Disposed

Mohd. Naseem and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home and Another

Allahabad HC15 Mar 2022/1132/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant withdrew the plea of false implication. The court disposed of the petition, directing the applicant to appear within 15 days to file a bail application for expeditious hearing under the Satender Kumar Antil case law.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty granted to file bail application before trial court within 15 days for expeditious hearing.

Mohd. Naseem and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1132 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Naseem And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Dept. Of Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar,Smt. Ranjana Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 10.3.2021 issued by Special Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (Ayodhya Prakaran), Lucknow in complaint case no. 490 of 2019 Police Station- Thakurganj, District , Lucknow under Sections 323, 452, 506 I.P.C. as well as non bailable warrants dated 4.12.2021 and also prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners/applicants submitted that they have falsely been implicated in the present case due to some political rivalry. It is further submitted that no such incident had occurred as alleged in the complaint.

¶7

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has submitted that from the complaint and the statement recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and 202 Cr.P.C. prima facie case is made out and the summons have already been issued and due to non appearance non bailable warrants have also been issued against the petitioners/applicants. Learned A.G.A., however, controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioners on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial and, therefore, the petition is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.

¶8

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not want to press the petition and seeks liberty to file bail application before the learned trial court which may be decided in view of law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court in order dated 7.10.2021 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Cri) No.5191 of 2021 Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another .

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioners.

¶10

On due consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties', it is provided that in case, the petitioner appears before the trial court within fifteen days' from today and file bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (supra) .

¶11

The petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.3.2022 Anuj Singh

¶13

Digitally signed by ANUJ PRATAP SINGH Date: 2022.03.15 15:09:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Naseem and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Naseem and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Dept. of Home 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

Saroja Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Additional Chief Secy., Dept. of Home and 6 Others

Vishva Deep Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Others

Gokaran Singh @ Ranjeet Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home Dept. and Another

Devi Gharan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lal Ji Vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and 3 Others