Dismissed

Veekesh Kumar and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2021A482/9417/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant sought to quash a charge sheet under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the court found the allegations disclosed a cognizable offence. The application was rejected. The claim for specific bail directions was denied as apex court guidelines suffice.

What did the court decide?

The prayer to quash the charge sheet and consequential proceedings is rejected; no specific direction for bail is issued.

Veekesh Kumar and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

xcCourt No. - 77

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9417 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Veekesh Kumar And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet dated 24.12.2020, under sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 342, 427 IPC, cognizance order dated 8.2.2021 passed by A.C.J.M.-17, Etah in Case No. 772 of 2021 (State Vs. Veekesh Kumar and others) arising out of case crime No. 343 of 2020, P.S. Aliganj, District Etah.

¶7

On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicant.

¶8

At this Court, in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.

¶9

At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicants and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicants by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicants.

¶10

As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.

¶11

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.

¶12

Order Date :- 10.11.2021

¶13

RPD

Veekesh Kumar and 7 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veekesh Kumar and 7 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

Abdul Raheem @ Abbu and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar Kushwaha Vs State of U.P.

Waseem and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Bihari Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chintu @ Akshya Tewari Vs State of Up and Another

Sarita Verma Vs State of U.P.