Dismissed

Shivbachan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Aug 2023A482/28005/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 Cr.P.C. application, the applicant failed to press the prayer to quash the summoning order on merit. The High Court rejected the quashing prayer but directed the lower courts to decide the pending bail application expeditiously under the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash summons dismissed. Direction given for bail decision and surrender within two weeks.

Shivbachan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:154800

¶2

Court No. - 4

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28005 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shivbachan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the records.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 06.06.2023 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No.15, Azamgarh in Case No.258 of 2023 (State Vs. Chhotelal and others) arising out of Case Crime No.244-A/2012, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 308 IPC, P.S. Maharajganj, District Azamgarh. Further prayer is made to direct the court below to decide the bail application of the applicant in view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2021 (10) SCC 773.

¶8

On the matter being taken up, learned counsel for the applicant has not pressed the relief as sought by means of this application on merit and prayed for issuance of appropriate direction to the concerned Courts below to decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in allowing the aforesaid prayer of the applicant.

¶10

Accordingly the relief as sought by the applicant through this application is refused.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that applicant shall surrender before the concerned Court below within two weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil

¶12

Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶13

For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.8.2023 Pramod Tripathi

¶16

Digitally signed by :- PRAMOD TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivbachan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivbachan 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

Mohd Riyaz Warasi Vs Smt Shagufta and 4 Others

Mushtaq Ahamed Vs Mohd. Imran

Mushtaq Ahamed Vs Fakeer Mohammad (Since Deceased) and 2 Others

Abdul Shahid Alias Ajju Vs Mohammad Ehtesham and 2 Others

Santosh Kumar Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lavkush Yadav and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another