Dismissed

Ajay Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Aug 2024A482/12182/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the prayer to quash the proceedings as not pressed. Instead, it granted three weeks for the applicant to appear and apply for bail or recall warrants, keeping non-bailable warrants in abeyance during that period; otherwise, the lower court acts under law.

What did the court decide?

Warrants kept in abeyance for three weeks or until applicant's appearance; applicant directed to apply for bail/recall within three weeks.

Ajay Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:130214

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12182 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sudhanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Ajay Kumar Shukla with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 7709 of 2021 (State Vs. Chandra Shekhar Pandey & others) charge sheet dated 23.05.2021, summoning order dated 16.11.2021 U/s 419, 420, 467, 468, 120-B, 409 IPC, arsing out of Case Crime No. 0751 of 2018, P.S. Kotwali, District Maharajganj, pending in the court of learned CJM, Maharajganj and with a further prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case and stay the NBW dated 10.10.2023 of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of the present application.

¶8

At the very outset learned counsel for the applicant fairly has placed before the Court an order dated 26.10.2023 of Crl. Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 24338 of 2023 (Ramesh Dut Pandey @ Ramesh Dutt and 7 others Vs. State of U.P. and another) which is annexure 12 to the affidavit in a matter of co-accused persons and submitted that a co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the said order in the matter of co-accused wherein the petition has been dismissed on merits however time has been granted to appear before the court concerned within two weeks and apply for bail which has been directed to be decided in view of the judgment of the Apex Court but for a period of two weeks or till the time of surrender therein has been ordered that they shall not be arrested in the matter. It is submitted that the present matter is an identical to that of co-accused which has been disposed of vide order dated 26.10.2023 by a co-ordinate Bench of Court. The prayer is same of the present 482 petition. He submits that the purpose of the applicant would be served if he is permitted to appear before the trial court within a period of three weeks from today and file a

¶9

regular bail application/an application for recall of non-bailable warrants and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

¶10

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

¶11

In view of the above, the prayer for quashing as prayed for 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 applicant, it is directed that if the accused-applicant appears and applies for bail/an application for recall of non-bailable warrants before the court concerned within three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶13

For a period of three weeks from today or till appearance of the applicant, whichever is earlier, the non-bailable warrants be kept in abeyance. However, if the applicant does not appear in the aforesaid time, the court concerned shall proceed as per law.

¶14

The present application is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 12.8.2024 M. ARIF

¶16

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶17

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

Ajay Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar Shukla 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

Balwant Singh vs State of Up

Mohammad Shahid vs State of U.P.

Shweta Shashikant vs Directorte of Enforcement

Vikas Sharma and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Gupta and 10 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Mateen and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others