Disposed

Manoj Sonkar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2022A482/1322/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court rejected the applicant's petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing proceedings, holding grounds could be decided by the trial court. It granted a three-week stay on coercive action and directed the trial court to decide future bail applications based on Satender Kumar Antil principles if accused surrender.

What did the court decide?

Quashing refused; no coercive action for three weeks; trial court directed to decide bail under Satender Kumar Antil if accused surrender.

Manoj Sonkar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1322 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Manoj Sonkar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Yadav,Firdos Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiva Kant Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Aslam,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is moved by the applicants for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 3062 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 183 of 2020, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 427, 325, 308 I.P.C., Police Station- Atrauliya, District- Azamgarh, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.11, Azamgarh as well as chargesheet no. A18/2021 dated 21.01.2021.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has confined his argument to the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773 and prayed for disposal of the bail application of applicants.

¶8

From the perusal of record, it appears that grounds alleged in the application can be decided by the trial court, therefore, I do not find any cogent reason to interfere in the cognizance/summoning order.

¶9

The prayer for quashing of proceedings is refused.

¶10

However, if the accused-applicants surrender before the court below and move bail application within a period of three weeks from today, the court below shall decide the bail application according to the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

¶11

For a period of three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶12

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 25.3.2022 Vikas

¶14

Digitally signed by VIKAS VERMA Date: 2022.03.28 13:06:58 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Manoj Sonkar and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj Sonkar and 3 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

Sahjal Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Naveen Kumar Gupta @ Naveen Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Babua Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Imami Vs State of U.P. and Another