Satya Prakash v. State of U.P. and 2 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
Interim notice order in a Section 482 application seeking quashing of pending Section 319 proceedings to summon the applicant; further trial proceedings stayed against applicant pending counter affidavits.
What did the court decide?
Further proceedings of the session trial stayed against the applicant until further orders.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 78
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21101 of 2024
Applicant :- Satya Prakash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Tiwari,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Shri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned proceedings of Session Trial No. 432-A of 2006 (State of U.P. Vs. Satya Prakash), arising out of Case Crime No. 20 of 2005, whereby the proceedings under Section 319 of Cr.P.C to summon the applicant under Sections 147, 302, 120-B of I.P.C. is pending.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that after set-aside the earlier orders passed by the trial court, no fresh order has been passed till filing of the present application. It is further submitted that co-ordinate Bench of this Court remand back the matter to decide the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. a fresh vide order dated 11.11.2011.
It is further submitted that the present Session Trial was separated from the original Session Trial. It is further submitted that the original Session Trial has been concluded vide judgment dated 08.01.2014. It is further submitted that before passing the final sentenced order against the applicant and other co-accused persons, the application under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has not been decided. In this regard learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgment of a Constitution Bench of the Apex Court in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Vs. The State of Punjab 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 1009.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Satya Prakash
- respondent
State of U.P.
- respondent
Opposite Party No. 2
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · July
- Registered
- Case no.
- A482/21101/2024
All orders in this case
8 orders share this CNR
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court