Disposed

Vijay Bahadur v. State of U.P. Another

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2023A482/41004/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In S. 482 Cr.P.C. application, applicant relinquished quashing prayer and sought bail. Court directed applicant to approach trial court by four weeks for bail in light of Satendra Kumar Antil guidelines. No coercive action taken during tenure.

What did the court decide?

Stayed coercive action against the applicant for four weeks to enable filing of bail application in trial court.

Vijay Bahadur Vs State of U.P. Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41004 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding, impugned summon order dated 22.11.2022 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur in Complaint Case No. 7383/2022, State Vs. Vijay Bahadur, under Section 4/21 of Mines & Minerals (Development & Regulation) Act, 1957 and under Sections 3, 58, 72 of U.P. Sub Mineral (Transportation), Rule, 2021, Police Station Chunar, District Mirzapur.

¶7

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant relinquish the prayer for quashment and wish to move bail application before the trial court in view of the guidelines / observations given by Hon'ble The Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has no objection.

¶9

Considering the above submissions and taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicant appears before the court concerned within four weeks from today and move application for bail, the same shall be considered and disposed of in terms of the guidelines / observations given by Hon'ble The Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).

¶10

For a period of four weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶11

It is made clear that in the event no such application is moved within the time prescribed above, this order will be of no avail to the applicant.

¶12

With the above direction, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 9.1.2023 Vinod.

¶14

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

Vijay Bahadur v. State of U.P. Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijay Bahadur v. State of U.P. Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ravi Kumar Jain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Zabbar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinit Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Balwinder Kaur @ Kiran Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Netrapal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ruchi Mittal @ Smt Ruchi Garg Vs State of U.P. and Another