Disposed

Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC10 May 2024CRLA/1589/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Appellants filed a criminal appeal to quash summoning order but withdrew merit arguments seeking bail directions. High Court discharged the appeal, allowing appellants to apply for bail within 30 days, while Police were directed to refrain from coercive action.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to apply for bail within 30 days; Police directed not to take coercive action until bail application filed.

Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma and 3 Others vs State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36065

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1589 of 2024

¶4

Appellant :- Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma And 3 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Lavlesh Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the appellants/applicants and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The present appeal has been filed with a prayer to quash/set aside the summoning order dated 09.02.2024 passed by Special Judge, (S.C./S.T. Act), Barabanki in Sessions Case No. 399/2023, under Sections- 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section3(1)(r) of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, DistrictBarabanki.

¶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 appellants submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that appellants 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 applicants/appellants, the appeal is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the appellants apply for bail before the Court below within 30 days from today, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. The appellants' counsel is also at liberty to move an application for discharge.

¶13

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 appellants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, they would not taken any coercive action against the appellants in the aforesaid case.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 10.5.2024 Arun/-

¶16

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

Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mosim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

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

Sateera Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Vansh Kashyap @ Shanu Vs State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Golu @ Alok @ Alok Verma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Saurabh Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Homes Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another