Disposed

Shaleesh Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jul 2024A482/5920/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application to quash criminal proceedings. The applicant withdrew the merit argument and requested directions for an expeditious bail hearing. The court granted liberty to move bail within 30 days and directed the lower court to decide it quickly, while instructing police not to take coercive action during this period.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to move bail within 30 days for expedited hearing; police directed not to take coercive action.

Shaleesh Ahmad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45558

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5920 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Shaleesh Ahmad And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Smriti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash/set aside entire proceedings of summoning order dated 21.02.2024 in Criminal Case No. 4411 of 2024, Crime No. 462 of 2023 under Section 323, 506, 308, 325 IPC, P.S.-Madhoganj, District-Hardoi as also the Charge Sheet No. 449 of 2023, dated 17.12.2023.

¶8

Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and going through the record as also taking note of the same in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq, another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843 , on being confronted, after arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to move bail application, before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

¶10

The Apex Court, after considering the various pronouncements on the issues, in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021 has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific directions need to be

¶11

issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court.

¶12

Keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, the application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicant applies for bail before the Court below within 30 days from today, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶13

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra), this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officers concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier, they would not taken any coercive action against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the present application is disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 4.7.2024 Vinay/-

¶16

Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shaleesh Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaleesh Ahmad and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Sectt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Nafis Ahmad Alias Mohammad Nafis Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 4 Others

Raviker Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Rajesh Jaiswal @ Gudda Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow

Suraj Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Taslimunnisa and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Raju Rawat and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another