Dismissed

Sheela Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023A482/3527/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing charge sheet and summoning order, the counsel did not press the quashing prayer. The court held the quashing prayer dismissed as not pressed but directed that if the accused surrenders and applies for bail within three weeks, it shall be decided expeditively.

What did the court decide?

Disposal of quashing prayer by dismissal as not pressed; direction to applicant to surrender and apply for bail within three weeks for expeditious consideration; stay of coercive action granted condit

Sheela Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3527 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sheela Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kuamr Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Rakesh Kuamr Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Sheela Devi with the prayer to quash the charge sheet no. 1 dated 20.2.2021 under Sections 120B, 420 I.P.C. in Case No. 761 of 2022, State of U.P. vs. Bhana Devi and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2020, Police Station Lalganj, District Basti and also summoning order dated 14.2.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basti and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case and the summoning order.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant states that the purpose of the applicant would suffice if an order is passed directing the trial court to decide the bail application of the applicant, as expeditiously as possible. He further states that although the prayer has been made for quashing of the charge sheet and the summoning order in the case but he does not press the same. He further states that the applicant shall raise all the questions before the trial court.

¶9

Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing of summoning order/charge sheet is dismissed as not pressed.

¶11

However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that if the accused-applicant surrenders before the trial court and applies for bail within three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in

¶12

accordance with law and even considering the fact that the applicant being a lady is entitled to the benefit of Section 437 Cr.P.C. Till the aforesaid period, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶13

It it clarified that if the accused-applicant does not appear before the court concerned by the said date, the court concerned shall proceed against her in accordance with law.

¶14

The present application is disposed of.

¶15

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Naresh

¶17

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

Sheela Devi v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheela Devi 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

Ram Bharose Vs State

Jishan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sarbajeet Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahees Khan @ Patela and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nanhe @ Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and Another