Allowed

Rais Ahamad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Mar 2023A482/8809/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an S. 482 Cr.P.C. application where the applicant waived the prayer to quash the proceeding u/s 82 Cr.P.C. and sought only a stay. The court allowed a 30-day stay on non-bailable warrants, directing the applicant to appear and apply for bail within that period under the supervision of the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Stay of non-bailable warrants for 30 days; direction to appear and apply for bail before the trial court within that period.

Rais Ahamad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8809 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rais Ahamad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Om Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sai Girdhar, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Rais Ahamad with the prayer to stay the impugned proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. in Case No. 110 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 188 of 2019, under Section 354, 452, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ahiraula, District Azamgarh, pending before the Judicial Magistrate/F.T.C., Azamgarh and with the further prayer to set aside the order dated 19.1.2023, proceeding 82 Cr.P.C. in Case No. 110 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 188 of 2019, under Section 354, 452, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ahiraula, District Azamgarh.

¶8

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not want to press the prayer for setting aside the impugned order and the proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. He states that the purpose of the applicant would be served if he is permitted to appear before the trial court within a period of 30 days from today and file a regular bail application but till then the impugned proceedings as initiated against him may be kept in abeyance.

¶9

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

¶10

In view of the above, the prayer for setting aside the impugned order and the proceeding under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 appears and applies for bail before the court concerned within 30 days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance

¶12

with law. Till the aforesaid period, the non-bailable warrants shall be kept in abeyance.

¶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

It is further clarified that no application for extension of time as granted by this Court shall be entertained.

¶15

The present application is disposed of.

¶16

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 16.3.2023 Naresh

¶18

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

Rais Ahamad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rais Ahamad 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 Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Abdul Samad Vs State of U.P and Another

Keshav Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Jain and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neraj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others