Disposed

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

Allahabad HC15 Sept 2022A482/16199/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Application No. 16199 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court did not quash the summoning order. Instead, it directed the trial court to decide the applicant's bail application based on the Supreme Court's law in Satender Kumar Antil cases.

What did the court decide?

Direction given to trial court to decide bail application based on law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil.

Rajendra Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16199 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Muktesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Muktesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA, for the State, and perused the record of the case.

¶6

By way of the present application, the applicant has made a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 7.11.2019, under Sections 406 and 506 IPC passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.17, Allahabad in Complaint Case No. 134 of 2018, Police Station Soraon, District Allahabad.

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

¶9

Accordingly, it is directed that if applicant appears before the trial court within three weeks from today and move bail application then his 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

¶10

Kumar Antil (supras). With these direction/observation, the present application is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶11

Order Date :- 15.9.2022 SKM

¶12

Digitally signed by SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA Date: 2022.09.17 13:38:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Prasad Yadav 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

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

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