Disposed

Ashik Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow, U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Jan 2024ABAIL/119/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC for offences under Section 376-D IPC, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Act was disposed of. The court declined to grant bail but directed the trial court to expedite the disposal of any regular bail application if the applicant surrenders within a week, relying on Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued for trial court to expedite regular bail disposal upon surrender within one week; anticipatory bail application disposed of.

Ashik Ali vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:7927

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 119 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ashik Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow, U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bhup Chandra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,S.P. Singh Somvanshi

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard leaned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, as well as learned counsel for the complainant/informant, and perused the record.

¶7

This application has been moved by the applicant- Ashik Ali for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.0225 of 2016, under Section 376-D IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(1)(xii) SC/ST Act lodged at Police Station Kandhai, District Pratapgarh.

¶8

At the outset, learned counsel for the complainant/informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State submits that the instant anticipatory bail application is not maintainable on two scores, at first the process under Section 82-83 CrPC has been issued against the applicant way back in the year 2019 and secondly as per the amended provision of Section 438 CrPC as is applicable to the State of U.P. by virtue of amendment dated 22.09.2022, the anticipatory

¶9

bail application is not maintainable with regard to offence committed under Section 376-D IPC.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant, at this stage, submits that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the trial and is intending to appear before the trial Court for the purpose of procuring regular bail, however, he is apprehending that disposal of his regular bail application may take long time and, in the meantime, he may be lodged in prison, thus, appropriate directions be given to the trial Court in this regard.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant/complainant may not have any objection to the said request made by the learned counsel for the applicant on the score that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 and In Re: To issue certain Guidelines Regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in Criminal Trials v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others , MANU/SC/0292/2021 has given detailed guidelines and time-line for the disposal of the regular bail application moved by the under trials/convicts under Section 437, 439 and 389 CrPC.

¶12

Having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases, mentioned above, the instant anticipatory bail application, moved on behalf of the applicant - Ashik Ali, is disposed of with a diretion that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the trial Court and moves application for regular bail within a week from today , the trial Court shall be under an obligation to dispose of the same with utmost

¶13

expedition, in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases, mentioned above, strictly in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 29.1.2024 MVS/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashik Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow, U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashik Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow, U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ayush Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Govt. Lucknow

Jang Bahadur Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sanjay Bajpai Vs State of U.P Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Dr. Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs Ashish Rawat Asst. Director (Pmla) Directorate of Enforcement Lko.

Aman Rajput Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt.

Ravi Shankar Tiwari Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko.