Atul Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy.. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Atul Pandey and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy.. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with liberty as prayed for: (i) liberty to apply for bail before the trial court, such prayer to be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law; (ii) liberty to move a discharge application before the court below if charges have not already been framed, to be decided expeditiously absent legal impediment; and (iii) an observation, taking note of Satendra Kumar Antil and Musheer Alam, that the Police Officer concerned is expected not to take coercive action against the applicants for 30 days or till they apply for bail, whichever is earlier. The quashing prayer itself was not adjudicated on merits.

Issue for consideration

Whether the impugned chargesheet dated 25.06.2024 and summoning order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Case No. 2792/2024 (arising out of FIR No. 120/2024, Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Karaundikala, District Sultanpur) should be quashed and further proceedings stayed. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

The application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for; if the applicants apply for bail before the court below, the prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

Liberty is granted to the applicants to move a discharge application before the court below, if charges have not already been framed, and the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no other legal impediment.ratio¶6
Taking note of the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (Supra), this Court observed that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from the date of the order, or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 14, Manish Kumar, J.), order dated 3.4.2025, in Application U/S 482 No. 2662 of 2025 (Atul Pandey and another v. State of U.P. and another): an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. praying for quashing of the chargesheet dated 25.06.2024 and summoning order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Case No. 2792/2024 'State vs. Atul Pandey & Ors.', arising out of FIR No. 120/2024 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Karaundikala, District Sultanpur, pending before the Civil Judge (Senior Division)/FTC, Sultanpur, was disposed of on counsel's submission rather than adjudicated on merits. Liberty was granted to apply for bail and to move a discharge application before the court below, both to be decided expeditiously in accordance with law; and, taking note of the Apex Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine SC 116, the Court observed that the police are expected not to take coercive action against the applicants for 30 days or till they apply for bail, whichever is earlier.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18572

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2662 of 2025

Applicant :- Atul Pandey And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy.. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. has been preferred with the following prayer:-

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned chargesheet dated 25.06.2024 and summoning order dated 22.08.2024 in Criminal Case No. 2792/2024 'State vs. Atul Pandey & Ors.' arising out of FIR No. 120/2024, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Karaundikala, District Sultanpur, currently pending before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/FTC, Sultanpur, and as contained in Annexure1 and 2 to this petition.

To stay the further proceeding in Criminal Case No. 2792/2024 'State vs. Atul Pandey & Ors.' arising out of FIR No. 120/2024, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Karaundikala, District Sultanpur, currently pending before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division)/FTC, Sultanpur, during the pendency of this petition before this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice."

After arguing the matter at some length, Sri Iqbal Ahmad, learned counsel, holding brief of Sri Sukh Deo Singh, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicant to file bail application before the trial court which may be directed to be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 : (2022) 10 SCC 51 and Musheer Alam vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another, 2025 SCC Online SC 116, and also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may also be directed to be decided expeditiously.

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

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, prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Liberty is also granted to the applicants to move discharge application before the court below, if charges have not already been framed, and the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no any other legal impediment.

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra) and Musheer Alam (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, they would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Nitesh

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench