Disposed

Ankur Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2024A482/31787/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to quash proceedings, the applicant did not press the substantive prayers. The court dismissed the quashing petition as not pressed but directed abeyance of non-bailable warrants for two weeks conditioned on the applicant's appearance.

What did the court decide?

Order abeyance of non-bailable warrants for two weeks if applicant appears; otherwise, warrants to proceed as per law.

Ankur Pratap Singh vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:154280

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31787 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ankur Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Rai,Om Prakash Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

1. List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Om Prakash Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Ankur Pratap Singh, with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 2303 of 2023 and to quash the order of cognizance as well as summoning order dated 07.11.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 367 of 2022, under Sections 171C, 323, 504, 506, 186 I.P.C., Police Station Ganj, District Rampur pending in the court of 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (M.P./M.L.A. Court) Rampur. It is further prayed to stay the entire proceeding against the charge sheet dated 14.07.2023 and the cognizance as well as summoning order dated 7.11.2023 in the said case, during pendency of this application.

¶9

After arguments on merits at length learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not want to press the prayers made in the present petition on merits. He submits that vide order dated 09.2.2024 non bailable warrants have been issued against the applicant. 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 two weeks from today and file a regular bail application/an application for recall of non-bailable warrants.

¶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

¶13

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 two weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law.

¶14

For a period of two 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.

¶15

The present application is disposed of.

¶16

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 21.9.2024 Naresh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankur Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankur Pratap Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

X- Juvenile vs State of U.P. and Another

Seraj vs State of Up and Another

Harsh Vardhan Singh Bhadoria vs State of U.P. and Another

Usman Ali and Another vs State of Up and Another

Keshav Deo Chaturvedi vs State of U.P.

Narendra Pratap Rao vs State of U.P. and Another