Disposed

Anoop Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2021A482/1088/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the main prayer of quashing proceedings as accused withdrew the request. Instead, the Court directed that if the applicant surrenders to the trial court within 30 days and seeks bail, the bail application will be heard expeditiously. No coercive action will be taken during this period unless the applicant fails to appear.

What did the court decide?

Temporary stay on coercive action for 30 days conditional on appearance to seek bail.

Anoop Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1088 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 02.07.2018 containing the cognizance order thereon and the entire proceedings of Case No. 708 of 2019, State v. Anoop and others, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 336, 354 I.P.C., Police Station Karchhana, District Allahabad, arising out of Case Crime No. 597 of 2017, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate-I, Allahabad.

¶7

At the very outset learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that he does not want to press the principal prayers seeking quashing of the proceedings as well as summoning order as have been made in the application. He is ready to submit to the jurisdiction of the court, seek bail and accept all the conditions, which this Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The only prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the hearing of the bail application may be done expeditiously.

¶8

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the prayer, insofar as it relates to seeking quashing of the proceedings as well as summoning order, stands refused.

¶9

However, 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

¶10

decided expeditiously in view of the settled law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court.

¶11

For a period of 30 days from today or till the appearance of the applicant before the court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him/her. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of.

¶13

It is made clear that no application seeking extension of time shall be entertained if this order is not complied with within the aforesaid period.

¶14

Order Date :- 21.1.2021 SKT/-

Anoop Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Beeru Singh and Another Vs State of U.P.

Manveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Fardeen Vs State of U.P.

Harish Kumar and 4 Other Vs Union of India

Jitendra Nath Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Jalandhar Traders Vs State of U.P. and Another