Dismissed

Ram Prakash and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Oct 2023A482/39108/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad considered an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash proceedings. Since the applicant did not press the quashing prayer on merit but sought expedited bail hearing, the court refused the quashing prayer. Instead, the applicant's co-applicant was directed to surrender within three weeks, ensuring no coercive action is taken until surrender or the cou

What did the court decide?

Application for quashing refused. Applicant No. 2 directed to surrender within three weeks; no coercive action during this period.

Ram Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:204283

¶2

Court No. - 89

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39108 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Prakash And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Wajid Ali,Syed Mohammed Jafer Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the cognizance order dated 08.01.2019; charge sheet dated 24.06.2016 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.55 of 2019 (State Vs. Ram Prakash & Another) Crime No. 89 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 406,504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Khaga, District Fatehpur.

¶7

On the matter being taken up, learned counsel for the applicants 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. Applicant no. 1 is already on bail.

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that applicant no. 2 shall surrender before the concerned Court below within three 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 Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶11

For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant no. 2 before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Meenu Singh

¶14

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Prakash and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Prakash 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Umesh Kumar Patel @ Chunna Lal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Radha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Kumar Patel and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lala Ram Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shan Mohammadand 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Manisha and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another