Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynath Mishra and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2025A482/18239/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

482 CrPC quashing application refused as not pressed; Allahabad HC; cognizance/summoning order 24.11.2023, IPC 323/504/354/506/341, Case No.1386 of 2023, charge sheet 157/2023, crime no.58/2023, PS Kotwali Chunar Mirzapur; surrender within three weeks; expedite bail per Satender Kumar Antil 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922; interim no coercive action; disposed 17.4.2025; Deepak Verma J.

What did the court decide?

Quashing/stay relief refused; alternative prayer allowed by way of directions — surrender within three weeks, expeditious bail decision per Satender Kumar Antil, and interim immunity from coercive action until surrender. ¶¶14

Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynath Mishra and 2 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the cognizance and summoning order dated 24.11.2023 in Case No.1386 of 2023 (with Charge Sheet No.157 of 2023) should be stayed/quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

¶¶7

Court's answer

The principal relief sought in the Section 482 application (stay/quash of the cognizance and summoning order and charge sheet) is refused, the applicants having not pressed it on merit.

¶¶10

Ratio / Principle

Applicants are directed to surrender before the court below within three weeks, and any bail application shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021 SCC OnLine SC 922).

¶¶11

Key takeaways

Interim protection: no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants for three weeks from the date of the order or until they surrender before the court below, whichever is earlier.ratio¶¶13
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions.ratio¶¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.), Application U/S 482 No. 18239 of 2024, decided 17.4.2025 — Section 482 Cr.P.C. application to stay/quash cognizance and summoning order dated 24.11.2023 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Crime Against Women, Mirzapur, in Case No.1386 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 354, 506 and 341 I.P.C., and Charge Sheet No.157 of 2023 (Crime No.58 of 2023, P.S. Kotwali Chunar, Mirzapur): counsel did not press the relief on merit; relief refused. Applicants directed to surrender within three weeks; bail applications, if moved, to be decided expeditiously in accordance with Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922; no coercive action in the interim period. Application disposed of.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:56767

¶2

Court No. - 84

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18239 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynath Mishra And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to stay/quash the impugned cognizance and summoning order 24.11.2023 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Crime Against Women, Mirzapur under Sections 323, 504, 354, 506 and 341 I.P.C. in Case No.1386 of 2023 (State Vs. Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynarayan Mishra and others) and Charge Sheet No.157 of 2023 dated 12.06.2023 arising out of Case Crime No.58 of 2023, Police Station-Kotwali Chunar, District-Mirzapur, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Crime Against Women, Mirzapur.

¶8

On the matter being taken up, learned counsel for the applicants have not pressed the relief as sought by means of this application on merit and prayed for issuance of appropriate direction to the concerned Courts below to decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in allowing the aforesaid prayer of the applicants.

¶10

Accordingly the relief as sought by the applicants through this application is refused.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicants, it is directed that applicants shall surrender before the concerned Court below within three weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶12

For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of

¶13

surrender of the applicants before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶14

With the aforesaid directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands disposed of.

¶15

Order Date :- 17.4.2025 Nitin Verma

¶16

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynath Mishra and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajan Mishra @ Hridaynath Mishra and 2 Others v. State of Up 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