Disposed

Shivpratap Singh @ Sonu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2020A482/931/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of a summoning order in a criminal trial for murder and attempted murder. The High Court refused to quash the order but directed the trial court to consider the bail application expeditiously and stayed coercive action for one month pending surrender.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed; direction to trial court to consider bail expeditiously; stay of coercive action for one month pending surrender.

Shivpratap Singh @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 931 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shivpratap Singh @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Pravesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ram Pravesh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicant for quashing the summoning order dated 04.11.2019 passed in Session Trial No.332 of 2014, (State versus Ravi Singh), Case Crime No.133 of 2014, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 IPC, Police Station Ghiror, District Mainpuri.

¶7

Learned Counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Without any sufficient evidence, he has been summoned by the trial Court by invoking power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to face the trial under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 IPC. Lastly he submits that applicant is ready to approach the Court below for bail, therefore, he may be given some time to surrender before the Court below and a suitable direction be issued for considering his bail application.

¶8

Learned AGA has no objection to the aforesaid request regarding the direction of bail.

¶9

Upon over all consideration of submissions made by learned Counsel for parties and perusal of record, I do not find any good reason to interfere in the impugned order.

¶10

Application is dispose of with a direction to the Court below to consider the bail application of the applicant expeditiously, in accordance with law, and keeping in view of the settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) and judgement of Division Bench of this Court in Brahm Singh & others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2016 (7) ADJ 151. If applicant surrenders and applies for bail within a period of one month from today.

¶11

For a period of one month from today or till their surrender whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, appropriate action shall be taken against him, in accordance with law.

¶12

Order Date :- 10.1.2020 I.A.Siddiqui

Shivpratap Singh @ Sonu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivpratap Singh @ Sonu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shiv Bahadur Yadav Alias Lalu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Kashyap Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ravindra Kumar Tomar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gyan Singh Lodhi Vs State of U.P. and 8 Others

Waseem and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another