Single judge quashed an application under Article 142 of the Constitution seeking stay of a trial for being protracted. The court noted the Supreme Court had earlier directed undertrial protection and declined to make a separate decision.
Application dismissed; no specific relief granted under Article 142.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8240 of 2022
Applicant :- Sughar Singh Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
vkosndx.k dh vksj ls /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds vUrxZr ;g vkosnu i=] eq0v0la0 273 lu 2019] vUrxZr /kkjk 323 Hkk0na0fo0 ,oa 3(2)5A, 3(1)R,S] ,l0lh0@,l0Vh0 ,sDV] Fkkuk lqesjiqj] ftyk gehjiqj ls mn~Hkwr Lis’ky okn la0 175 lu 2019] tks Lis’ky tt] ,l0lh0@,l0Vh0 ,sDV] gehjiqj ds U;k;ky; esa yfEcr gS] ds fo:) nk;j fd;k x;k gSA
vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk ,oa fo}ku vij 'kkldh; vf/koDrk dks lquk rFkk i=koyh dk ifj’khyu fd;kA
mHk; i{k ds fo}ku vf/koDrkvksa ds rdksZ dks Jo.kksijkUr] i=koyh ds ifj’khyu ls] U;k;ky; us ik;k fd izFke lwpuk fjiksVZ esa yxk, x, vkjksi ,d laKs; vijk/k ds deh’ku dk [kqyklk djrs gSa vkSj og vkjksi] dh x;h foospuk ds mijkUr yxk, x, gSa] mu vkjksiksa dks bl U;k;ky; }kjk /kkjk 482 na0iz0la0 ds rgr viuh 'kfDr dk iz;ksx djrs gq,] tkWp ds nkSjku ,d= dh x;h lkexzh ds vkjksiksa dh 'kq)rk vkSj fo’oluh;rk dk vkdyu djus dh vko’;drk ugha gS] bl Lrj ij vfHk;qDr ds fookfnr cpko ij fopkj ugha fd;k tk ldrk gSA rnuqlkj vkjksi i= ;k mijksDr okn dh dk;Zokgh dks jnn djus dh izkFkZuk vkSj ifj.kkeh dk;Zokgh vLohd`r dh tkrh gSA
bl Lrj ij] vkosndx.k ds fo}ku vf/koDrk dk vuqjks/k gS fd vkosndx.k dks vHkh rd mijksDr ekeys esa fxjQrkj ugha fd;k x;k gS vkSj iqfyl vkosnd dks fxjQrkj djus ds iz;kl esa gS] vkSj lacaf/kr voj U;k;ky; }kjk vkosndx.k ds f[kykQ n.MkRed izfdz;k tkjh dh tk ldrh gS] blfy, vkosndx.k ds tekur vkosnu i= ij fopkj djus ds fy, lacaf/kr voj U;k;ky; dks funsZ’k tkjh dj fn;k tk;A
ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation and another ( Apecial Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ds izdj.k dks vkns’k fn0 7&10&2021 }kjk igys gh tekur gsrq fn’kk funsZ’k nsrs gq, fuLrkfjr fd;k tk pqdk gS] blds i’pkr~ vc lacaf/kr voj U;k;ky; dks tekur nsus ds fy, muds foosd vkSj fopkj dks fu;af=r djus okys oS/kkfud izkfo/kkuksa dks izHkkfor fd, fcuk] bl U;k;ky; }kjk dksbZ fof’k"V funsZ’k tkjh djus dh vko’;drk ugha gS] D;ksafd ;g vis{kk dh tkrh gS fd lacaf/kr voj U;k;ky; vkosnd ds tekur izkFkZuk i= dks fuLrkfjr djrs le; ekuuh; mPpre U;k;ky; }kjk igys ls tkjh vko’;d fn’kkfunsZ’kksa dks /;ku esa j[ksxkA
mijksDr fVIif.k;ksa ds lkFk] ;g vkosnu i= vfUre :i ls fuLrkfjr fd;k tkrk gSA fn0 % 4&7&2022 ds0lh0flag
Digitally signed by KAILASH CHANDRA SINGH Date: 2022.07.04 16:59:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
3 issues framed by the court
Whether this application is protracted and no exceptional circumstances exist to justify quashing the FIR.
Whether the High Court was required to exercise its power under Article 142 in view of the Supreme Court's undertrial order.
Whether the High Court should grant probation or recall the case to the现有 court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (A.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021)Explained¶9
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sughar Singh Yadav
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
