Disposed

Rakesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and Another

Allahabad HC9 Jan 2024/91/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a section 482 Cr.P.C. application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings. Since the applicant withdrew merits preferentially seeking bail directions, the court issued a limited order for expedient consideration of future bail applications.

What did the court decide?

Disposed application with direction that bail application, if filed by applicants, shall be considered expeditiously.

Rakesh and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2125

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 91 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Gyanendra Pathak, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anurag Verma, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the impugned proceeding of Criminal Case No. 25152/2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 117/2023, under Sections 147, 452, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Baundi, District Bahraich pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/FTC, Bahraich.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot go into the correctness of the allegations made against the applicants and has only to examine whether on the basis of the allegations made and material collected during investigation, the offences are made out against the applicants or not.

¶10

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.I. v. Aryan Singh , 2023 SCC Online SC 379 has held that while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct a mini trial. It does not require the prosecution/investigating agency to prove the allegations. While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".

¶11

Confronted with the aforesaid objection, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the

¶12

extent that applicants may be permitted to surrender and move an application, before the court concerned seeking bail and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

¶13

Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of by observing that in case the applicants appear and file an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, including the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I. , (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶14

Order Date :- 9.1.2024 Pradeep/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rakesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rakesh Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Janki Prasad and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Srivastava Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Mahangu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Mohammad Wasiuddin Alias Waseem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Yogesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Govt. Lko. and Another