Disposed

Rameshwar Dayal v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC12 May 2022A482/10764/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the main prayer to quash proceedings. However, upon the applicant's counsel giving up the challenge and seeking surrender protection, the Court directed a short protection period within which the applicant must surrender and the bail application must be disposed.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued: Non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for four weeks; applicant to surrender; bail application to be disposed of expeditiously.

Rameshwar Dayal Vs State of U.P and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10764 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rameshwar Dayal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gyan Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge sheet dated 15.10.2020, cognizance order dated 26.11.2020, non bailable warrant dated 10.08.2021 issued against the applicant and proceedings of Case No.1090 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No.60 of 2020, under Section 420, 406 I.P.C., P.S. Sakrauli, District Etah.

¶7

At the outset learned counsel for the applicant gave up his challenge to the aforesaid charge sheet, Non-bailable warrant and criminal proceedings against the applicant and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicant to surrender before the concerned court below. The learned counsel for the applicant further stated at the Bar that he is not pressing any other prayer made in this application on merits and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. submits that in case the applicant is not pressing the relief as sought for by him on merits and wants to surrender before the concerned court below, he has no objection if the Court grants protection to him for a short period.

¶9

In view of the above, the relief as sought by the applicant in the instant application is refused.

¶10

However considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned court below within four weeks from today and in case he applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of

¶11

Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶12

For the period of four weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the concerned Court below, whichever is earlier, non-bailable warrant dated 10.08.2021 shall be kept in abeyance.

¶13

With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.5.2022 Meenu

¶15

Digitally signed by MEENU SINGH Date: 2022.05.13 17:47:11 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rameshwar Dayal v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rameshwar Dayal 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

Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Guddo and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Satya Narayan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Sonu @ Devkinandan Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Murali Dhar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyendra Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another