Dismissed¶¶13

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2025/10291/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 application dismissed as not pressed on merits; quashing of Complaint Case No. 462 of 2022 (Raju Vs Chaundhi Lal & another), Sections 34, 420, 467, 468 I.P.C., P.S. Para, Lucknow; summoning order dated 03.04.2024 by Special Additional Civil Judge S.D./A.C.J.M. Court No. 20, Lucknow; liberty of 4 weeks to surrender before trial court; fresh application to be decided expeditiously; A.G.A. no objection; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; single judge Brij Raj Singh, J.; decided December 8, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Dismissal with liberty as prayed: 4 weeks' time for the applicant to surrender before the trial court; any subsequent application by the applicant to be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. ¶¶13

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10291 of 2025

Raj Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. And Another	Home U.P. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anjum Ara, Mohammad Irfan Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 16

¶8

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

¶9

Sri Vishun Narain, Advocate, is present for the opposite party No. 2, by filing his vakalatnama , which is taken on record.

¶10

This application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of the impugned Complaint Case No. 462 of 2022, Raju Vs Chaundhi Lal & another, under Sections 34, 420, 467, 468 of I.P.C. Police Station Para, District Lucknow, as also of the impugned summoning order dated 03.04.2024 and its consequential order passed by the court of Special Additional Civil Judge S.D./A.C.J.M. Court, No. 20, District Lucknow, in the said case, contained as Annexure no. 1 to memo of the application, in the respect of applicant.

¶11

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 further submits that applicant may be granted 4 week's time to surrender before the trial court.

¶12

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

¶13

In view of the above, the application is dismissed with the liberty, as aforesaid. In case any such application is filed by the applicant, same will be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶14

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶15

December 8, 2025 A.Nigam

¶16

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

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Daljeet Singh @ Daljeet Singh Saluja Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Dherendra Nath Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Rajpal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Devendra Pratap Singh @ Devkaran Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Saurabh Mishra Alias Kallu Batista and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Missu @ Ravindra Jaiswal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko and Another