Dismissed

Dilshad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 May 2022A482/11116/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order dismissed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash a charge sheet and cognizance order in an kidnapping and attempted murder case. The court found the allegations disclosed a cognizable offence. It dismissed the quashing prayer and declined to issue specific bail directions, citing Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash charge sheet and cognizance order rejected; no specific direction issued for bail.

Dilshad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11116 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Dilshad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tiwari,Ram Chandra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 20.08.2020 registered as Criminal Case No. 4539 of 2020 (State Vs. Dilshad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 818 of 2019 under Sections 307 I.P.C. Police Station Khurja Nagar, District Bulandshahr pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahr and also to quash the cognizance order dated 21.09.2020 passed in the aforesaid case.

¶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 applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant 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 :- 4.5.2022 S.Ali

¶13

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.05.05 17:39:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dilshad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilshad 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

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

Dharmendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Chand Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sachin Badera Alias Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Taukeer Alias Kallu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and Another