Disposed

Ram Binod Alias Ram Vinod and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Jan 2024A482/165/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought quashing of a sessions trial under Sections 323/34, 308/34 and 506 IPC but did not press the prayer, opting to surrender and seek bail in sections added during charge framing. The court directed that their bail application be considered per Satendra Kumar Antil and Siddharth and barred coercive action for four weeks.

What the court decided

AI extract

Ram Binod Alias Ram Vinod and Another vs State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:2812

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 165 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Binod Alias Ram Vinod And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Narvind Kumar Singh,Deepak Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.243 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2016 under Sections 323/34, 308/34 & 506 IPC, Police Station Asiwan, District Unnao, including the cognizance order dated 17.03.2023 passed by learned District Sessions Judge, Unnao.

¶9

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant does not want to press the prayer for quashing the impugned proceeding and want to surrender before the court below and apply for bail in the added sections which were added during framing of charges. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that after the charge-sheet filed under Section 323 & 506 IPC, the applicant obtained bail and now during the framing of charges, Sections 308/34 & 504/34 have been added, therefore, certain protection may be given to the applicant.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid submission, it is provided that if the applicant surrenders and moves an application for bail before the court below within a period of two weeks from today in added sections, then his application shall be considered in view of the law laid down in Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 as well as in the case of Siddharth vs. State Uttar Pradesh (2022) Vol-I, SCC 676.

¶11

For a period of four weeks or till disposal of the bail application of the applicant, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in Sessions Trial No. 243 of 2023 pending before Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Unnao.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, present application is disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 10.1.2024 Manoj K.

¶14

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Binod Alias Ram Vinod and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Ram Binod Alias Ram Vinod and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Jitendra Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Munshi Lal and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Mayur Jaiswal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Manish Srivastava Alias Manish Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow

Ram Sumer Vs the State of U.P and Ors.

Mr. Prateek Boob Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another