Disposed

Nitin Tomar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2022A482/16057/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court did not press the prayer to quash criminal proceedings under the IPC and Dowry Act. Instead, it directed the trial court to decide the applicants', bail application based on the Apex Court's law in Satender Kumar Antil if they appear within three weeks. The application was disposed of with this direction.

What did the court decide?

Directed the trial court to decide the bail application in light of Satender Kumar Antil law within three weeks if applicants appear.

Nitin Tomar and 2 Others Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16057 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Nitin Tomar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Pandey,Rajnish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajnish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA, for the State, and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of the present application, the applicants have made a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1514 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.63 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Civil Judge(Junior Division)FTC-1st, Aligarh and as well as charge sheet dated 22.10.2021.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press the prayer made in the application. He confines his prayer only to the extent that a direction be given to the court concerned to decide the bail application of the applicants in the light of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Breau of Investigation, reported in 2021 (10) SCC 773 and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Breau of Investigation and others, MANU/SC/0851/2022.

¶8

Learned AGA is having no objection, if such a direction is given to the court concerned to decide the bail application of the applicants in the light

¶9

of the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supras).

¶10

Accordingly, it is directed that if applicants appear before the trial court within three weeks from today and move bail application then their bail application shall be decided by the court below on the basis of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supras).

¶11

With these direction/observation, the present application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶12

Order Date :- 15.9.2022 SKM

¶13

Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.17 12:12:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitin Tomar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin Tomar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Goyal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Farman Chirodiya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Love Dubey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another