Single judge allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. granting protection from coercive action for 21 days and directing lower courts to expedite hearing of surrender and bail applications, referencing Supreme Court guidelines.
No coercive action for 21 days; directions to file surrender application and expedite bail hearing.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:98732
Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6674 of 2023 Applicant :- Shivam Gaur Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anjali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Ms. Kavita Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Mrs. Anjali Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the order dated 09.01.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge F.T.C. Court No. 2, Mau in Criminal Revision No. 129 of 2021 (Shivam Gaur Vs. State of U.P. and others) and the order dated 18.08.2021 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Civil Judge(Senior Division) Mau, in Criminal Case No. 8815 of 2021 whereby the cognizance has been taken on the charge sheet dated 30.05.2021 filed in Case Crime No. 567 of 2020, under section 379 of IPC, Police Station Madhuban, District Mau.
After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant gave up his challenge to the aforesaid prayer and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicant to surrender before the concerned court below. The learned counsel for the applicant further stated at the Bar that he is not pressing any other prayer made in this application on merits and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application/surrender application of the applicants expeditiously.
Learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. submits that in case the applicant is not pressing the relief as sought for by him on merits and want to surrender before the concerned court below,
he has no objection in granting protection to him for a short period.
In view of above, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicants shall file a surrender application before the concerned court below on or before 23rd May, 2023. On receiving the surrender application, the court concerned shall obtain instructions from the public prosecutor and fix a date for appearance/surrender of the applicant(s) and for hearing the applicant(s) on surrender application.
On the date fixed by the Court concerned, the applicant(s) will have liberty to prefer a bail application and a copy of the same be provided to the public prosecutor. In case, any such bail application is filed, the same shall be considered by the court below along with the surrender application, on the date fixed, in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773.
For the period of 21 days from today or till the surrender application is decided, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
In case the applicant(s) does not comply with the aforesaid directions, the court below shall be free to take such measures for appearance of the applicant(s) as required under the law.
With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
Order Date :- 8.5.2023/Arti
Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether protection from coercive action should be granted to the applicant while facilitating surrender.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶9
(2021) 10 SCC 773 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shivam Gaur
State of U.P.
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
