Disposed

Praduman Kumar Mishra @ Babbu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Jul 2024A482/5956/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the charge sheet and summoning order. The applicant withdrew the merit-based plea, requesting permission to move for bail. The Court directed the lower court to decide the bail application expeditiously and instructed police to refrain from coercive action for 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with liberty to move for bail within 30 days and a direction to police to refrain from coercive action during that period.

Praduman Kumar Mishra @ Babbu vs State of U.P. Thru… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45990

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5956 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Praduman Kumar Mishra @ Babbu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vijayendra Prakash Tripathi,Vivek Kumar Shukla

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶8

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

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶10

"For the facts reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned charge sheet no 143 of 2015, dated 14/08/2015, case Crime No.268/2015, under section 352/406 IP.C at police station- Maharajganj, District-Faizabad / Ayodhya, and also prayed for quashing of impugned order dated 03/03/2016 by which the Judicial Magistrate Ist, Ayodhya/Faizabad issued summoning order against the Petitioner as contained in annexure no 1& 2 to this petition.

¶11

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the proceeding of criminal case no. 1953/2021, arising out case Crime No.268/2015, under section 352/406 IPC at police station Maharajganj. District- Faizabad Ayodhya pending before the Civil Judge (S.D.) IIIrd/A.CJM. Ayodhya Faizabad, in the interest of justice"

¶12

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 submits 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

¶13

same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

¶14

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

¶15

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 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.

¶16

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 present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. 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.

¶17

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observation 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, he would not taken any coercive action against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 5.7.2024 Anuj Singh

¶20

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

Praduman Kumar Mishra @ Babbu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Praduman Kumar Mishra @ Babbu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Aaftab Ahmad @ Babloo and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mridula Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Amit Kumar Azad and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Rajesh @ Subedar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Amrendra ( as Per Fir Amrendra Rawat Alias Gupta ) vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Riyasat Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another