Disposed

Sushil Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2024A482/41023/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of summoning order and criminal proceedings under Section 384 IPC but did not press it on merits; he requested interim protection for surrender. The court disposed of the application directing surrender within three weeks, expeditious bail consideration per Satender Kumar Antil guidelines, and no coercive action meanwhile.

What did the court decide?

Interim protection from coercive action until surrender or expiry of three weeks; direction to decide bail application expeditiously after surrender.

Sushil Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:188707

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41023 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sushil Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Pal,Rajesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Syed Qamar Hasan Rizvi,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Prabhakar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajesh Kumar Shukla, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing of the order issuing non bailable warrant dated 16.10.2024 and cognizance/summoning order dated 2.12.2021 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 14984 of 2021 (State vs. Shivam @ Shiva and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 266/2021, under Section 384 IPC and Section 66-C of Information Technology Amendment Act,, police station Jaithra, district Etach pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court No. 17, Etah.

¶8

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant does not press the relief sought for quashing the aforesaid impugned orders or the criminal proceedings on merits. Instead, the applicant seeks limited relief in the form of interim protection for a reasonable period to facilitate his surrender before the concerned court and requests an expeditious hearing and disposal of his bail application.

¶9

Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State has stated that he has no objection to such limited relief being granted.

¶10

In view of the submissions made and the restricted scope of the prayer, this application is disposed of with the following directions:

¶11

The applicant shall surrender before the concerned court within a period of three weeks from today. Upon such surrender, if the applicant moves an application for bail, the concerned court shall consider and decide the same expeditiously, strictly in accordance with law and in light of the guidelines enunciated by the Hon'ble

¶12

Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another , 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶13

Furthermore, it is directed that, until the applicant surrenders or the expiry of three weeks from today, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be initiated against him in the aforesaid case.

¶14

With the above observations and directions, this application stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.12.2024 Sumaira

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SUMAIRA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sushil Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Chauhan 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

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kvg Realtech Private Ltd. Thru. Authorized Signatory Mr. Ravi Shanker Srivastava vs Abha Khanna

Azad Ali and Others vs Suresh and Others

M/S Pan Realtors Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi Thru. Authorized Representative, Mr. Rajneesh Kumar, Sitapur vs Mrs. Neela Chavhan

Ashok Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Rawat vs State of U.P.

Sheetala and Another vs State of U.P. and 4 Others