Dismissed

Ramnarayan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary, Home, Government o

Allahabad HC19 Aug 2021ABAIL/14989/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court rejected anticipatory bail application after charge sheet submission. However, permitted applicants to surrender and apply for regular bail which will be heard expeditiously citing Supreme Court precedents on speedy trial.

What did the court decide?

Application rejected; applicants permitted to surrender and apply for bail to be heard expeditiously.

Ramnarayan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav Vs State of Uttar Pradesh… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 14989 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ramnarayan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of Uttar Pradesh Through Secretary, Home, Government O Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned AGA submits that the police after investigation, has submitted the charge sheet against all the applicants on 21.01.2020. Therefore, the present anticipatory bail looses its efficacy, accordingly, the same is hereby rejected .

¶7

However, applicants are permitted to surrender before the court concerned and apply for bail and their bail application shall be heard and decided as expeditiously as possible in the light of ratio laid down in the judgment of Hussain And Anothers Vs. Union of India (2017) 5 SCC 702 relevant extract of which reads as under:-

¶8

".............Judicial service as well as legal service are not like any other services. They are missions for serving the society. The mission is not achieved if the litigant who is waiting in the queue does not get his turn for a long time.".............."Decision of cases of under-trials in custody is one of the priority areas. There are obstructions at every level in enforcement of right of speedy trial – vested interests or unscrupulous elements try to delay the proceedings."..........." In spite of all odds, determined efforts are required at every level for success of the mission."........."Presiding Officer of a court cannot rest in the state of helplessness. This is the constitutional responsibility of the State to provide necessary infrastructure and of the High Courts to monitor the functioning of subordinate courts to ensure timely disposal of cases."

¶9

Order Date :- 19.8.2021 Nisha

¶10

Digitally signed by RAHUL CHATURVEDI Date: 2021.08.21 15:10:12 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramnarayan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary, Home, Government o

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramnarayan Yadav @ Pappu Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary, Home, Government o

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

Smt. Reeta Alias Geeta Sonkar Vs State of Up and Another

Ramesh Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yogendra Kumar Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Banvari and 6 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmpal @ Dharmpal Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others