Disposed

Mohd. Akram and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2020A482/18186/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings, the applicant's counsel withdrew the prayer for quashment and sought expeditious bail decision. The court directed the applicant to apply for bail within 45 days with no coercive action permitted during this period.

What did the court decide?

Applicants directed to appear in trial court for bail within 45 days; no coercive action during this period.

Mohd. Akram and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18186 of 2020 Applicant :- Mohd. Akram And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Bhan Dubey,Bhupesh Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶4

Heard Sri Chandra Mohan Dubey, learned counsel holding brief of Sri Surya Bhan Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State.

¶5

The applicants have sought for the following relief in the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.:-

¶6

"to quash the entire proceeding of complaint Case No. 3678 of 2019, (Swalin Vs Mohd. Akram and another) under Section 376D, 323, and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Kila, District Bareilly, as well as summoning order dated 27.08.2020, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 5th, Bareilly . "

¶7

Learned A.G.A. contends that the learned trial court had applied its mind and accorded full consideration to the material in the record before summoning the applicants. Prima facie offence is made out against the applicants. He also calls attention to the statement of the victim/complainant recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶8

Faced with this, Sri Chandra Mohan Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants do not press the relief sought in the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He recasts his relief and submits that the applicants will appear before the learned trial court and apply for bail.

¶9

The only prayer made by Sri Chandra Mohan Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants is that bail application of the applicants may be decided expeditiously.

¶10

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this application is disposed of with the following directions:

¶11

I. The applicants will appear before the learned trial court and apply for bail within a period of 45 days.

¶12

II. In case the bail application is filed within the aforesaid period, the learned trial court shall decide the bail application expeditiously in the light of law laid down by this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported at 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement entered by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P . reported at 2009 ( 3) ADJ 322 (SC) .

¶13

III. For a period of 45 days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶14

IV. In case the applicants do not apply for bail in the aforesaid period of 45 days, this order shall stand automatically recalled without recourse to this Court. The learned trial court shall proceed thereafter in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 8.12.2020 Pravin

Mohd. Akram and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Akram and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Devesh Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Doctor and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepshikha and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harvir and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandrabhan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Firoj Vs State of U.P. and Another