Disposed

Dasarath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2024A482/405/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. without quashing warrant. Allowed applicant to appear and file bail application for expeditious hearing, referencing Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Applicants permitted to appear and file bail application for expeditious hearing; current application disposed without quashing warrant.

Dasarath and Another vs State of U.P. Thru… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:5180

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 405 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Dasarath And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashant Vikram Singh,Akshaya Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Prashant Vikram Singh, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rishikesh Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the impugned non bailable warrant dated 21.12.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 2162/2018 (Shivmurti v. Arun Kumar & Ors.) pending in the court of learned Civil judge, Junior Division 4th/Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad.

¶8

The learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot go into the correctness of the allegations made against the applicants and has only to examine whether on the basis of the allegations made and material collected during investigation, the offences are made out against the applicants or not.

¶10

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.I. v. Aryan Singh , 2023 SCC Online SC 379 has held that while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct a mini trial. It does not require the prosecution/investigating agency to prove the allegations. While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the CrPC the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".

¶11

Confronted with the aforesaid objection, the learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this

¶12

application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to surrender and move an application, before the court concerned seeking bail and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

¶13

Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of by observing that in case the applicants appear and file an application for their release on bail, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, including the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I. , (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶14

Order Date :- 18.1.2024 Pradeep/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dasarath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dasarath and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Abhishek Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Satyendra Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

The New India Assurance Company Limited Thru. Officer in Change vs Ahshan Khan and 2 Others

Lalta Prasad Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lucknow and Another

Dasarath and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another