Disposed

Sanjeet Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023A482/9821/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court dismissed the unpressed prayer to quash proceedings. It directed that if applicants surrender and apply for bail within two weeks, the trial court must decide expeditiously; otherwise, coercive action may follow.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings and stay filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed as not pressed. Direction given for bail consideration on surrender within two weeks.

Sanjeet Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9821 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjeet Kumar And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Majahar Ali,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Majahar Ali, learned counsel for the applicants, 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 applicants Sanjeet Kumar, Nand Kishor, Dharmendra, Santosh and Mahasharay with the prayer to allow this application and quash the charge sheet dated 14.12.2021 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 8834 of 2022 (State Vs. Sanjeet and others), under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 354, 308, 427 IPC, arising out of Case Crime No. 524 of 2019, Police Station Tarya Sujan, District Kushinagar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of the present application.

¶8

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 and staying the further proceedings of the case but he does not press the same.

¶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 quashing and staying the further proceedings of the aforesaid case 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 applicants, it is directed that if the accused-applicants surrender before the trial court and apply for bail within two weeks from

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

The present application is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 M. ARIF

¶16

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjeet Kumar and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjeet Kumar and 4 Others 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

Navneet Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailash and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mehilal and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramvilas and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Atmaram Yadav@ Atmaram and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohit Jaiswal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another