Disposed

Dinesh Kumar v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2020A482/19172/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant withdrew his petition to quash criminal proceedings but sought protection from coercive action and a direction for expedient bail hearing. The Court refused the quashing plea but granted a direction for no coercive action for 45 days and expedited bail consideration.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against the applicant for 45 days; lower courts directed to dispose of bail application expeditiously.

Dinesh Kumar Vs State of Up and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19172 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shri Krishan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1 and perused the record with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 985 of 2014 (Ved Prakash vs Dinesh Kumar), under sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC, and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Kotwali Hathras, district Hathras pending in the court of CJM, Hathras.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.

¶8

After advancing certain arguments at length by the learned counsel for the applicant when the Court put certain query to him, he gave up his challenge to the proceedings of aforesaid case against the applicant and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicant to surrender before the concerned court below. Learned counsel for the applicant further stated at the Bar that he is not pressing any other prayer made in this application on merits and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶9

In view of above, the relief as sought by the applicant in the instant application is refused .

¶10

Considering the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that in case applicant appears before the concerned court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law keeping in view of the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Criminal Law Journal 755 as

¶11

well as judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., (2009) 4 Supreme Court Cases, 437.

¶12

For the period of 45 days from today or till the date of appearance of the applicant before the concerned court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the above case.

¶13

With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

¶14

It is directed that in case certified copy of this judgment is not issued due to COVID-19 pandemic, the copy of the judgment downloaded from the official website of the Allahabad High Court shall be acted upon.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.12.2020 Sazia

Dinesh Kumar v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dinesh Kumar v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Nisha Vs State of U.P. and Others

Sachchidanand Dev Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Vimlesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. 2 Others

Smt. Alka Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Smt. Priti Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Salman Haider Educational and Charritable Trust Vs State of U.P. and Another