Disposed¶9

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

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2025/633/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 application quashing; Criminal Case No. 11657/2024; Crime No. 97/2024; Sections 504, 506 IPC; P.S. Mahrajganj, Raebareli; ACJM-I Raebareli; Charge Sheet No. 1; cognizance order 12.07.2024; Satender Kumar Antil (2022) 10 SCC 51; liberty to file bail application; liberty to file discharge application; no coercive action for 30 days; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Saurabh Lavania, J.; disposed of 24.1.2025.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of: liberty to applicants to file a bail application and a discharge application before the trial court, both to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law; police officer concerned expected not to take coercive action against the applicants for 30 days or until they apply for bail, whichever is earlier. ¶9

Arun Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 11657/2024 (Crime No. 97/2024, u/s 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Mahrajganj, District Raebareli) pending before ACJM-I, Raebareli, together with Charge Sheet No. 1 and the cognizance order dated 12.07.2024, should be quashed.

¶6

Court's answer

Application disposed of with liberty to the applicants to apply for bail before the trial court; the court below directed to consider and decide the bail prayer expeditiously in accordance with law, keeping in view the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Applicants granted liberty to move a discharge application before the court below, which shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶10

Key takeaways

Taking note of the observations in Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the police officer concerned is expected not to take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case for a period of 30 days from the order or until the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:4771; Saurabh Lavania, J.; Order dated 24.1.2025): Section 482 application by Arun Kumar and another seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 11657/2024 (Crime No. 97/2024, u/s 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Mahrajganj, Raebareli) pending before ACJM-I, Raebareli, alongwith Charge Sheet No. 1 and cognizance order dated 12.07.2024 - disposed of with liberty to the applicants to file bail application and discharge application before the trial court, both to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law, in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51; further observed that the police officer concerned is expected not to take any coercive action against the applicants for 30 days or until they apply for bail, whichever is earlier.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4771

¶2

Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 633 of 2025 Applicant :- Arun Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- S.K. Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶4

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

¶5

The present application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶6

"to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 11657/2024 of Crime No. 97/2024 u/s 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Mahrajganj, District Raebareli pending in the court of ACJM-I, Raebareli alongwith Charge Sheet No. 1 submitted in Crime No. 97/2024 u/s 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Mahrajganj, Raebareli (Annexure No. 1) and the cognizance order dated 12.07.2024 (Annexure No. 2)."

¶7

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicants to file bail application before the trial court which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351: (2022) 10 SCC 51 as also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may be decided expeditiously.

¶8

Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶9

Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicants apply for bail before the Court concerned, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶10

Liberty is also granted to the applicants to move discharge application before the court below and the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶11

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 Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, he would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Jyoti/-

¶14

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sutunisha and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sandeep Nishad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Shashi Kant Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Home Secy. Lko. and Another

Ajay Kumar Singh Alias Ajay Kumar Vs Sub Division Magistrate Patti Pratapgarh and 3 Others

Tarik Husain Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

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