Disposed

Smt. Meera Devi and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2023A482/26645/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In bail proceedings during a trial, the High Court rejected an application to quash FIR and charge-sheet. The Court allowed an alternative prayer, directing the trial court to pass a speaking order on a future discharge application filed by the applicants.

What did the court decide?

Direction to trial court to decide discharge application by speaking order upon filing.

Smt. Meera Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.and… — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:199156

¶2

Court No. - 88

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26645 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Smt. Meera Devi And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Karunesh Narayan Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 37 of 2022 dated 05.07.2022, cognizance order dated 24.08.2022 and proceedings of criminal case no. 608 of 2022 (State vs. Bhanendra and others) arising out of case crime no. 25 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Sambhal pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Sambhal at Chandausi.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are sister-in-law and brother-inlaw of the opposite party no. 2. The applicants are on bail vide order dated 16.05.2023 passed by Civil Judge, J.D./F.T.C., Sambhal at Chandausi.

¶9

After advancing some argument at length and putting certain query by the Court, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that since the applicants are already on bail in this case, therefore, they may be permitted to move a discharge application before the court concerned raising their objections. Learned counsel for the applicants also submits that moving a discharge application before the concerned trial Court is a legal / statutory right of the accused, therefore he is not pressing any further relief as claimed by applicants by means of this application at this stage.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. submits that in case the applicants are not pressing the relief as sought for by them on merits and wants to move discharge application, he has no objection.

¶11

Accordingly, the relief as sought by the applicants in the instant application is refused.

¶12

However considering the above alternative prayer of the applicants, it is directed that in case the discharge application is moved by the applicants before the court concerned at the appropriate stage, the same shall be decided by the court concerned by speaking order in accordance with law.

¶13

With the aforesaid observations and direction, the application is disposed of .

¶14

Order Date :- 16.10.2023 Saurabh

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Meera Devi and Another v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Meera Devi and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Beenu Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Balam @ Shashi Bhushan Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shravan Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Sanjeev Kataria and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Ashish Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another