Disposed

Nepal Singh Sagar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2020A482/3573/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash a non-bailable warrant and entire proceedings was refused as it involved factual disputes. However, a 30-day freeze was granted on the warrant, and bail prayer will be considered if the applicant surrenders within this period.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash refused; N.B. Warrant kept in abeyance for 30 days; bail to be decided if applicant surrenders.

Nepal Singh Sagar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3573 of 2020 Applicant :- Nepal Singh Sagar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devi Prasad Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the Non bailable warrant dated 1.11.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.769 of 2018 (State Vs. Nepal Singh), arising out of Case Crime No.598 of 2016, under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Kotwali Shahar, DistrictBulandshahar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar.

¶6

The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of causing harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.

¶7

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the materials brought on record, it does not appear to be a fit case to quash the impugned order. The prayer to quash the same is hereby refused, at this stage as the argument raised by learned counsel for the applicant involves factual disputes and appraisal of evidence.

¶8

However, looking at the nature of offence alleged and attending facts and circumstances of the case, as have been brought on record, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶9

For a period of 30 days from today, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

¶10

The present application stands disposed of .

¶11

Order Date :- 28.1.2020 Junaid

Nepal Singh Sagar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nepal Singh Sagar 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

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajad and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Sheela and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ram Raj Patel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Salim Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Veer Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Singh Vs State of U.P.