Disposed

Shamim Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Jul 2022A482/10180/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash summoning order was refused as offence clearly made out. Court granted four months respite from coercive action and directed consideration of discharge application within one month.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash summoning order and bailable warrant refused; four months respite from coercive action granted; discharge application to be considered.

Shamim Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10180 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shamim Ahmad And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant, Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A for State.

¶6

This application has been under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 05.02.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 19, Azamgarh in Complaint Case No. 2264 of 2019 (Leelawati Devi Vs. Shamim Ahmad and others) under Sections 323, 420 I.P.C., P.S.- Bilariaganj, District- Azamgarh as well as quash the Bailable warrant dated 12.10.2021 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.) Court No. 15, Azamgarh bearing new Case No. 6202 of 2021 (Leelawati Vs. Shamim Ahmad).

¶7

From the perusal of material on the record and looking into the matter of the case, at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant.

¶8

The prayer for quashing the summoning order as well as bailable warrant of the aforesaid case is hereby refused.

¶9

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, if applicants move an application for discharge within one month from today before court concerned with certified copy of this order, their application shall be considered and decided in accordance with law by the court concerned within three months.

¶10

Only till four months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case, subject to law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Vs. CBI (2018) 16 SCC 299.

¶11

With the aforesaid observation, the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 28.7.2022 Sharad/-

¶13

Digitally signed by SHARAD KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.07.29 12:32:30 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shamim Ahmad and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamim Ahmad 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mamnoonnisha Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Bhagwat Prasad @ Sardar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Banwari and 13 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Prajapati and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Firoj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another