Dismissed

M/S Delhi Gorakhpur Trans. v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2021A482/6490/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant challenged a court order requiring a Rs. 20 lakh surety for vehicle release, arguing the insured value was only Rs. 4 lacs. The High Court held the application as highly belated and dismissed it, though the challenge application itself was not formally pressed by the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The application was dismissed with liberty to the applicant to seek appropriate remedy before the court below.

M/S Delhi Gorakhpur Trans. Vs State of U.P. — Motor Accident Claims | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6490 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- M/S Delhi Gorakhpur Trans. Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Suresh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Sushma Soni, learned AGA for the Stateopposite party.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to set aside the order dated 03.01.2019 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Fast Track/ACJM, Gorakhpur in Vehicle (UP78/AN4011) Release Application No.258 of 2018 in Case Crime No.258 of 2018, under Sections 279, 304A IPC, Police Station Rajghat, District Gorakhpur to the extent it relates to the amount of surety of Rs.20 lacs, and further that the amount of sureties may be decreased so that the vehicle UP78/AN4011 may be released.

¶7

The only ground which is sought to be canvassed to raise a challenge to the order dated 03.01.2019 passed by the court below is that although the insured value of the vehicle at the relevant point of time was Rs. 4 lacs only the court below while directing release of the vehicle has imposed a condition for furnishing surety of amount Rs.20 lacs.

¶8

Learned AGA points out that the order which is sought to be challenged was passed on 03.01.2019 and the present application having been filed highly belatedly is not liable to be entertained. It is also submitted that the order passed by the court below for release of the vehicle is an order which is in favour of the applicant and in case the applicant desires any modification in the said order, he may approach the court below.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant, at this stage fairly submits that he does not wish to press the present application and that he may be granted liberty to approach the court below by filing an appropriate application.

¶10

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present application is dismissed, leaving it open to the applicant

¶11

to seek appropriate remedy before the court below.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.7.2021 Nitendra

¶13

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

M/S Delhi Gorakhpur Trans. v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Delhi Gorakhpur Trans. v. State of U.P.

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

Ishwer Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nitin Bihari Goshwami @ Nitin Srivastava and 4 Othersr Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Izhaar Aziz Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Alok Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another