Disposed

Ram Dayal Pal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2024A482/70/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge considered a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of an order in a tribal offence case. The court disposed of the petition granting liberty to the petitioners to apply for bail within four weeks, referring to the Satender Kumar Antil principle.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed; liberty granted to appear/surrender and file bail application within 4 weeks.

Ram Dayal Pal and 2 Others vs State of U.P… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1813

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 70 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Dayal Pal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶6

1. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Bhushan Upadhyay, learned State Counsel.

¶7

2. In view of the proposed order, the notice to opposite party No.2 is hereby dispensed with.

¶8

3. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the impugned order dated 05.12.2023 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Pratapgarh in S.C. No.386 of 2022 (State vs. Ram Dayal Pal and others) arising out of Criminal Complaint Case No.44 of 2020 (State vs. Ram Dayal Pal & others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 452 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (1) (Da) and 3 (1) (Dha) and Section 3 (2) (5-A) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Kohdaur, District-Pratapgarh.

¶9

4. After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that though the petitioners are being unnecessarily harassed by the opposite party No.2 but they may appear before the court concerned and may file appropriate application for bail which may be considered and disposed of in the light of the dictum of Apex Court rendered in the case in re: Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI and others, Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No.5191 of 2021.

¶10

5. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the petitioners may be given liberty to avail other appropriate remedy available with them before appropriate court of law.

¶11

6. Be that as it may, it is needless to say that any aggrieved person may avail appropriate remedy before appropriate court of law. Besides, the liberty is given to the present petitioners to appear/ surrender before the court concerned by filing their bail application and if the petitioners file their bail application after appearing, the same may be heard and disposed of with

¶12

expedition, say within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of their bail application in the light of the dictum of Apex Court rendered in re: Satender Kumar Antil (supra) .

¶13

7. If the petitioners appear/ surrender before the court concerned within the aforesaid stipulated time, the bailable warrant issued against them may not be executed against them, failing which, the coercive steps may be taken against them by the competent authority/ court.

¶14

8. Accordingly, the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of finally.

¶15

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶16

Order Date :- 8.1.2024 Suresh/

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Dayal Pal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Dayal Pal and 2 Others 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

Ram Diwakar Verma Alias Ramdiwakar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Angad Pathak and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Ravi Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jyoti Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Braj Kishore Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ram Dayal Pal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another