Disposed¶9

Sariphun Nisha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Jul 2025A482/32938/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashing application not pressed on merits; PDPP Act 1984 sections 2/3; Case Crime No.339 of 2021, P.S. Phoolpur, Varanasi; Case No.88009 of 2023 (State vs. Mohammad Rafique and Others); discharge application rejected by order dated 03.07.2024 of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Varanasi; disposed of with three weeks to appear and avail remedy, to be considered and decided expeditiously; no coercive action for three weeks; decided 11.7.2025 by Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.

What did the court decide?

Three weeks' time for the applicants to appear before the court concerned and avail whatever remedy is available at law, which the court concerned shall consider and decide expeditiously in accordance with settled law; and protection from coercive action against the applicants till three weeks. ¶9

Sariphun Nisha and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicants, who did not press the quashing application on merits, may be extended time to appear before the court concerned and avail whatever remedy is available at law.

¶8

Court's answer

The Section 482 Cr.P.C. application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if the applicants appear within a period of three weeks and avail whatever remedy is available at law, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

Till three weeks from the date of the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava, J.), Order Date 11.7.2025 — Application under section 482 Cr.P.C. by Sariphun Nisha and another seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No.88009 of 2023 (State vs. Mohammad Rafique and Others), arising out of Case Crime No.339 of 2021 under sections 2/3 of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984, P.S. Phoolpur, District Varanasi, including the order dated 03.07.2024 of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Varanasi rejecting their discharge application, was not pressed on merits. Counsel confined the prayer to extension of time for the applicants to appear before the court concerned and avail available remedies, to which opposite parties had no objection. The application was disposed of with a direction that if the applicants appeared within three weeks and availed their remedy, it would be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with settled law; and it was clarified that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants till three weeks.

Sariphun Nisha and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sariphun Nisha and Another 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases