Disposed¶11

Raju v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2025A482/31081/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad HC, 482 CrPC quashing application disposed as withdrawn with liberty to seek regular bail; Raju vs State of U.P.; Case Crime No. 419 of 2023, Sections 323/504/506/427 IPC, PS Bhamora, Bareilly; cognizance/summoning order 08.04.2024 not quashed; bail to be considered per Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth 2022 (11) SCC 676, Aman Preet Singh 2021 SCC Online SC 941; decided 10.02.2025 by Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; 2025:AHC:18831.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the applicant to withdraw the Section 482 application and file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction; any such bail application to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court observations in Satender Kumar Antil, Siddharth and Aman Preet Singh. The quashing prayer was not decided on merits. ¶11

Raju vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 599 of 2024 (State vs. Raju), arising out of Case Crime No. 419 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, PS Bhamora, District Bareilly, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.04.2024 ought to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC. (Not adjudicated; application permitted to be withdrawn.) +1 more

¶7

Ratio / Principle

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicant sought to withdraw the Section 482 application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction, and the Court accorded that liberty.

¶9

Key takeaways

Any bail application filed by the applicant's counsel shall be decided in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773; Siddharth v. State of U.P., 2022 (11) SCC 676; and Aman Preet Singh v. C.B.I., 2021 SCC Online SC 941.ratio¶10
The Section 482 application stands disposed of with the liberty aforesaid; the quashing prayer was not adjudicated.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Order dated 10.02.2025, Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:18831 — Raju's application under Section 482 CrPC (No. 31081 of 2024) sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 599 of 2024 (State vs. Raju), arising out of Case Crime No. 419 of 2023 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC, PS Bhamora, District Bareilly, and the cognizance/summoning order dated 08.04.2024 of the Additional JSCC/ACJM, Bareilly. Counsel for the applicant (not arrested during investigation; charge-sheet filed; offence punishable up to 7 years) sought leave to withdraw the application with liberty to move a regular bail application. HELD: application disposed of with liberty to file a regular bail application before the competent court; such bail application to be decided in the light of the Supreme Court's observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773; Siddharth v. State of U.P., 2022 (11) SCC 676; and Aman Preet Singh v. C.B.I., 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

Raju v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Rajnish Kumar @ Rahul vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Seth vs State of U.P.

Sudhir Alias Alok Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abid Ali vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramsiya vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Ravi Mataka @ Chipa @ Ravindra Surjhiya and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another