Disposed

Babalu Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Jan 2021A482/18090/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the plea for interference but directed the trial court to expedite the hearing of the applicants' pending bail application if they surrender within 45 days, staying coercive action during that period.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to consider pending bail application expeditiously if applicants surrender within 45 days; stay on coercive action.

Babalu Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18090 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Babalu Sharma And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA and perusing the material available on record, I do not see any merit in the present application warranting any interference by this Court.

¶6

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants made a prayer that the bail application of the applicants in ST No. 143 of 2020 (State Vs. Nitin Kumar and others), Case Crime No. 102 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C & Section 3 (2) 5A and 3 (1) (r) (s) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Bilariyaganj, District Azamgarh may be ordered to be considered expeditiously, if possible, on the same day by the concerned Court below where the said case is pending.

¶7

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the prayer so made by the learned counsel for the applicants, the application is disposed of finally with a direction that in case the applicants surrender before the concerned Court below within a period of 45 days from today and apply for bail, their bail application shall be considered in accordance with law and decided expeditiously preferably on same day in

¶8

view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of 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 Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶9

For a period of 45 days from today or till the applicants surrender and apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, interim order shall stand vacated automatically.

¶10

Copy of the order downloaded from the official website of the Allahabad High Court shall be accepted as a true copy of this order.

¶11

Order Date :- 7.1.2021

¶12

vinay

Babalu Sharma and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babalu Sharma and 2 Others 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

Sonu @ Gyanendra Saraswat Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Bachcha Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Salman and 7 Others Vs State of Up

Jitendra and 10 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Sagar Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ratan Dhobi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others