Disposed

Sonu Chauhan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2023A482/8938/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. requesting quashing of proceedings. Court dismissed quashing prayer as not pressed but directed expeditious bail consideration upon surrender within 30 days, staying coercive action temporarily.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing dismissed as not pressed; 30-day window set for bail application upon surrender with direction for expeditious disposal.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8938 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu Chauhan And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amiteshwar Shukla,Vijay Prakash Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Vijay Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.B. Maurya, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants- Sonu Chauhan and Smt. Rekha Chauhan with the prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceeding as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 19.11.2022 & cognizance / summoning order dated 02.02.2023 in Case No. 4908 of 2023 (State Vs. Sonu Chauhan and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 448 of 2022, under Sections 419, 420, 406 I.P.C., Police Station Pipraich, District Gorakhpur pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Gorakhpur with a further prayer that proceedings of the aforesaid case be stayed against the applicants during the pendency of the present application.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicants states that the purpose of the applicants would suffice if an order is passed directing the trial court to decide the bail application of the applicants, as expeditiously as possible. He further states that although the prayer has been made for quashing of the charge sheet, cognizance order and the proceedings of the case but he does not press the same.

¶10

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

¶11

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing of proceedings/cognizance order/charge sheet is dismissed as not pressed.

¶12

However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that if the accused-applicants surrender

¶13

before the trial court and apply for bail within 30 days 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 applicants.

¶14

It it clarified that if the accused-applicants do not appear before the court concerned by the said date, the court concerned shall proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶15

The present application is disposed of.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.3.2023

¶17

AS Rathore

¶18

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶19

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

Sonu Chauhan and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Chauhan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Anoop Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dheeraj Jindal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and 3 Others

Sonu Chauhan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another