Disposed

Hori Lal and 9 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2023A227/3670/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of Writ Petition challenging dismissal of revision on grounds of limitation and summoning order in criminal matter. Court directed petitioners to appear, surrender, and file bail application by May 8, 2023; no coercive measures pending.

What did the court decide?

Directs petitioners to appear and file surrender application by May 8, 2023; bail application to be decided together; no coercive measures until then.

Hori Lal and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 3670 of 2023

¶3

Petitioner :- Hori Lal And 9 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Dutt Tiwari Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶5

The present writ petition has been filed with the following prayer:

¶6

"a) It is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set aside the impugned order dated 16.03.2023 passed by Session Judge Rampur dismissing the application under section 5 of the limitation Act and summoning order dated 15.03.2022 passed by A.C.J.M. court no.-4 Moradabad of complaint case no.1652/2016 Vijendra Singh Vs. Ramkishor and others under section 147, 148, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427, 392 IPC P.S. Majhola District Moradabad pending in the court of Session Judge Rampur."

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.3.2023 whereby revision of the petitioners has been dismissed on the ground of limitation. It is further submitted that the summoning order dated 15.3.2022 is also subject matter of challenge before this Court.

¶8

At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against the petitioners and the petitioners apprehend that their personal liberty would be at peril and in case, petitioners appear before the court concerned their bail application may not be heard. It is further submitted that petitioners have already been enlarged on bail under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC.

¶9

Sri Ram Kumar Dubey, Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent no.2 and learned AGA appeared for the State. Both the counsel submit that they have no objection in case the bail application of the petitioners is heard provided petitioners appear and surrender before the court concerned in pursuance to the Non Bailable Warrant.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submission of learned counsel for the parties, since the question of liberty of petitioners is concerned, as such bail application are

¶11

required to be decided expeditiously. It is, therefore, provided that the petitioners shall appear and file surrender application before the court concerned on or before 8th May, 2023. On the surrender application, the court concerned shall obtain instructions from the Public Prosecutor and shall fix the date to surrender. Petitioners shall be at liberty to file bail application before the court concerned. The surrender application and bail application of the petitioners shall be decided together on the date fixed. For the period till 8th May, 2023, no coercive measures shall be taken against the petitioners in order to enable the petitioners to surrender before the court concerned in accordance with law. In case of default, the court concerned shall be at liberty to proceed for ensuring attendance of petitioners in accordance with summoning order.

¶12

With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition stands disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 27.4.2023 D. Tamang

¶14

Digitally signed by :- DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hori Lal and 9 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hori Lal and 9 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Monu Jaat Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Munna @ Jafar Kuraishi Vs State of U.P.

Sageer Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another