Disposed

Anoop Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Mar 2023A482/9015/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of proceedings and bail directions in a POCSO matter but did not press the quashing prayer. The High Court dismissed the non-pressed application and directed the trial court to consider bail expeditiously if the accused surrenders within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Quashing prayer dismissed as not pressed; bail application to be considered expeditiously if accused surrenders within 30 days.

Anoop Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Writ and Judicial Review | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9015 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vishesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Vishesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Anoop Kumar with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 21.6.2022 and summoning order dated 17.11.2022 as well as the entire proceeding of Special S.T. No. 337 of 2022 (State vs. Anoop Kumar), arising out of Crime No. 65 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.Mauaima, District Prayagraj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Allahabad and with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the said case.

¶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 charge sheet, 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/charge sheet 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 before the trial court and applies 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

¶12

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 :- 17.3.2023 Naresh

¶17

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

Anoop Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Kumar 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

Dheeraj Jindal Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and 3 Others

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

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