Disposed

Anoop Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2025A482/11652/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 CrPC challenging criminal proceedings and summoning orders in a cheating case. The Court granted liberty to the applicant to file bail and discharge applications before the trial court, directing expedited consideration and a 30-day stay on coercive police action.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to file bail and discharge applications; coercive action stayed for 30 days; proceedings not quashed.

Anoop Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:11

¶2

Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11652 of 2024 Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Pandey,Sandhya Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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

"i. To set aside the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 12425 of 2022 "State Versus Anoop Kumar Pandey" pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Lucknow, arising out of Case Crime No. 668 of 2021, under section-406 I.P.C. Police StationMadiyaon, District- Lucknow alongwith summoning order dated 21.12.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Lucknow and chargesheet dated 04.01.2022 as contained in Annexure No.1 & 2 to this petition.

¶7

ii. To stay the further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 12425 of 2022 "State Versus Anoop Kumar Pandey" pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Lucknow."

¶8

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicant 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.

¶9

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

¶10

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.

¶11

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

¶12

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 applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier, he would not take any coercive action against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 2.1.2025 Jyoti/-

¶15

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

Anoop Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop Kumar Pandey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Avinash Pratap Singh and Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ram Rasik Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Parmeshwar Deen Verma Vs State of U.P Thru Prin Secy Home Lko and Ors.

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

Sarvar Alam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Home Secy.Lko. and 2 Others

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