Disposed

Matibar Pandey and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2021A482/19678/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant's Section 482 CrPC petition to quash proceedings failed due to insufficient grounds. An alternative direction was issued for expedited bail hearing if applicants appear and surrender within 30 days, with no coercive action in interim.

What did the court decide?

Quashing prayer refused; direction for expeditious bail hearing if applicants appear and surrender within 30 days; no coercive action during period.

Matibar Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19678 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Matibar Pandey And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh,Shashi Prakash Misra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State-opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants to quash the proceedings of Case Crime No. 435 of 2015 under Sections 147, 308, 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Mehdawal, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants after making submissions to some extent has fairly submitted that the necessary grounds for invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 CrPC have not been made out in the facts of the present case. Accordingly, he does not wish to press his prayer as made in the present application.

¶9

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

¶10

At this stage counsel for the applicants has made an alternative prayer for a direction to be issued to the court below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicants, expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the concerned court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the court 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 CrLJ 755 as well as judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2009) 4 SCC 437 .

¶12

For the period of 30 days from today or till the date of appearance of the applicants before the concerned court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the above case.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 8.1.2021

¶15

Pratima

¶16

(Dr.Y.K.Srivastava,J.)

Matibar Pandey and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Matibar Pandey and 3 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Reena and Another Vs Rajveer Singh and 8 Others

Ankit Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shreeom Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bajrang Bahadur and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ajeet Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another