Dismissed

Vinod Baranwal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2021A482/3684/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash cognizance and charge-sheet, the applicant's counsel withdrew the principal prayer. The court refused the quashing relief but granted an alternative direction allowing bail consideration if applicants appear and surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Relief of quashing refused. Bail application consideration contingent on surrendering within 30 days.

Vinod Baranwal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3684 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Vinod Baranwal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shree Prakash Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashutosh Srivastava, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet dated 05.12.2017, cognizance/summoning order dated 20.01.2018 as well as order dated 15.01.2021 passed in Criminal Revision No. 37 of 2019 (Vinod Baranwal and other Vs. State of U.P. and another) in Case No. 272 of 2018 (State Vs. Vinod Baranwal and others) arising out of case crime no. 588 of 2017, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Bhadohi, District Bhadohi pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhadohi at Gyanpur.

¶7

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

¶8

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

¶9

At this stage, counsel for the applicants makes a submission that the applicants are ready to submit to the jurisdiction of the concerned court, seek bail and accept all the conditions which this Court may deem fit to impose upon them.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is provided that in case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be considered and decided by the concerned Court taking into view the settled legal position in this regard.

¶11

For a period of 30 days from today or till appearance of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶12

However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶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

With the aforesaid observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.2.2021 AK Pandey

Vinod Baranwal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Baranwal 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandesh Khard @ Sandesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhan Ullah and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Life Long Net Mart, Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Neha Jain Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Vinod Patel and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another