Disposed

Anil Gupta v. State of Up and 2 Others

Allahabad HC5 Nov 2024A482/25906/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of warrant and orders in an Electricity Act case citing health issues. The Court disposed of the application by directing the trial court to decide the recall application expeditiously, stayed coercive action for 20 days, and barred fictitious personal exemption applications.

What did the court decide?

Stay of coercive action for 20 days; direction to trial court to decide recall application expeditiously.

Anil Gupta vs State of Up and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:172574

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25906 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anil Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Renu Bala Mishra,Ved Prakash Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 12.06.2024 and 26.06.2024, passed by the Special Judge E.C. Act, Allahabad as well as Non Bailable Warrant order dated 06.05.2024 in Criminal Case No. 5A of 2008, titled as State v. Anil Gupta, arising out of Case Crime No. 90 of 2008, under Section 135 of Electricity Act, P.S. Muthiganj, District Prayagraj.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant submits that impugned order is against the facts and law. The applicant is suffering from spinal cord disorder disease since November 2021, due to which he could not appear on the date fixed by the trial Court, hence, non-bailable warrants were issued against the applicant.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and moves appropriate application before the trial Court for recalling the non bailable warrant orders, the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of 20 days or till the applicant

¶11

move an application before the trial Court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Further, the Court shall not entertain the fictitious and repetitive personal exemption application, and if filed, the same shall be dismissed with reasonable costs.

¶12

6. The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 5.11.2024 A. Tripathi

¶14

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶15

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anil Gupta v. State of Up and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Gupta v. State of Up and 2 Others

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

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu @ Deepak vs State of Up and Another

Mithlesh Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt Fahmida vs State of Up and Another

Ram Pukar Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another

Jogendar Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others