Disposed

Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Jul 2023/446/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application under Section 482 CrPC was filed to quash charges and summons. The High Court, finding a prima facie case, declined the quash prayer but allowed the applicant to file a discharge application through counsel within four weeks, with an undertaking for no coercive action during that period.

What did the court decide?

Applicant permitted to move discharge application through counsel within four weeks; no coercive steps to be taken during this period.

Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45656

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 446 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi,Farhat Jamal Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. and perused the material available on record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge sheet dated 21.8.2021 and the summoning order dated 9.11.2022 as well as consequential further proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0123 of 2021, under Sections 41, 411, 413, 419, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Pasgawan, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicants submits that the applicant is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity with the police. He further submits that applicant regularly comes to the clinic to assist the doctor at around 8:00 A.M. in the morning and stays till 8:00 P.M. or even lat as per requirement in the night. In view of above, this application deserves to be allowed.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. urged that there is sufÏcient evidence against the applicant and there is no occasion for quashing of the impugned summoning order and proceedings of aforesaid case.

¶10

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, a perusal of record and in the facts and circumstances of the case, a prima facie, case is made out against the applicant. Therefore, prayer for quashing the impugned summoning order as

¶11

well as proceedings of aforesaid case, is declined.

¶12

After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that he may be permitted to move discharge application through counsel and suitable directions may be issued for expeditious disposal of the same.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

¶14

In view of above, it is provided that applicant is permitted to move his discharge applications through counsel within four weeks' from today and, in case, any such application is being filed, the same shall be heard and decided expeditiously after hearing the parties, in accordance with law, by means of a reasoned and speaking order.

¶15

Till the aforesaid period of four weeks' and during the pendency of discharge application, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶16

In case of failure on the part of applicant in moving the discharge application within the aforesaid period, he will not be entitled to the benefit of this order.

¶17

It is clarified that after disposal of discharge application, the applicant will be subject to regular process of the court concerned, including bail etc.

¶18

With the above directions, this application is disposed of .

¶19

Order Date :- 12.7.2023 Gaurav/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdul Naeem Khan @ Naeem and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Ramsewak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another

Kashmir Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Others

Babita Tripathi Alias Babita Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt. Lko

Nusrat @ Nusrat Jahan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Shiv Vrat Raghuvanshi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Another