Disposed

Bechan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2023A482/6865/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 CrPC application, the High Court dismissed the prayer to quash proceedings as not pressed but granted an interim reprieve, directing the applicant to surrender and apply for bail within two weeks for expedited consideration.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash dismissed as not pressed; applicant directed to surrender and apply for bail within two weeks for expeditious consideration; no coercive action pending.

Bechan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6865 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Bechan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Nand Yadav,Anand Prakash Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Krishna Nand 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 Bechan with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 45 of 2021, Special Session Case No. 42 of 2022 (Hari Lal vs. Sandeep and others), under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Maharajganj, as well as summoning order dated 12.1.2022 issued by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 4, Maharajganj (POCSO Act), Maharajganj, in Complaint Case No. 45 of 2022, Special Session Case No. 42 of 2022, (Hari Lal vs. Sandeep and others), and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case as well as 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 summoning order and the entire proceedings of 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 proceedings/summoning order 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

¶12

before the trial court and applies for bail within two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. 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 him in accordance with law.

¶14

The present application is disposed of.

¶15

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 24.2.2023 Naresh

¶17

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

Bechan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bechan v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Vinod @ Vivek Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abdul Mobin Khan Vs State of U.P. and 12 Others

Rakesh @ Chandan Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Suraj Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sajara Khatoon @ Seema Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd. Farooq Vs State of U.P. and Another