Lalluram and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Lalluram and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing prayer refused; application consigned to record. Ancillary direction issued (para 13) that any bail application preferred thereafter be considered expeditiously, strictly as per law, without delay.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No. 3257 of 2024 (State Vs. Lalluram and others), arising out of case crime no. 59 of 2023 under Sections 341, 308, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Fatehganj, District Banda, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda, should be quashed pursuant to Section 482 CrPC. +1 more

Court's answer

Cognizable offences are made out from the FIR, and the arguments advanced by counsel centre on factual issues which cannot be gone into in the present Section 482 proceedings; accordingly, interference with the pending criminal proceedings is declined.

Ratio / Principle

Direction issued in response to counsel's request invoking Satender Kumar Antil: once a bail application is preferred, it shall be considered with the utmost expedition, strictly as per the law of the land, without any delay.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar, J.) — Application U/S 482 No. 3800 of 2025, Order dated 18.2.2025: Quashing application under Section 482 CrPC filed by Lalluram and 4 others against the entire proceedings of Case No. 3257 of 2024 (State Vs. Lalluram and others), arising out of case crime no. 59 of 2023, under Sections 341, 308, 504, 506 IPC against applicant nos. 1 to 4 and under Sections 504 and 506 IPC against applicant no. 5, Police Station Fatehganj, District Banda, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda — INTERFERENCE DECLINED; application consigned to record. The Court held that cognizable offences are made out from the FIR and that the arguments raised centre on factual issues which cannot be gone into in the present proceedings; the learned AGA had observed that the injury report (page 51) shows injuries sustained by the injured/informant faction. At counsel's instance, invoking Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (decided 07.10.2021, S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021) on enlargement on bail, the Court directed that once a bail application is preferred, it shall be considered with the most expedition, strictly as per the law of the land, without any delay.

Court No. - 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3800 of 2025

Applicant :- Lalluram And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanuj Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J.

Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of Ms. Pratiksha Rai and Shri Himashu Shukla, counsel for opposite party no.2, is taken on record.

Heard Sri Ramanuj Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri S.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State/opposite party no.1 and Ms. Pratiksha Rai and Shri Himashu Shukla, counsel for opposite party no.2.

This application under Section 482 Cr.PC. has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 3257 of 2024 (State Vs. Lalluram and others), arising out of case crime no. 59 of 2023, under Sections 341, 308, 504, 506 IPC against the applicant nos. 1 to 4, under Sections 504 and 506 IPC against the applicant no. 5, Police Station- Fatehganj, District Banda, pending before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda .

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and they have been falsely implicated in the case.

Learned AGA on the other hand submits that from the perusal of the injury report which is at page 51, injuries have been sustained by the injured/ informant faction.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

I am of the opinion of the court, cognizable offenses are made out from the FIR and whatever arguments are being sought to be raised centers around factual issues which cannot be gone into the present proceedings. Thus, interference is declined and the application is consigned to record.

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submits that suitable direction be issued in light of the judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another; decided on 07.10.2021 in S.L.P. No.5191 of 2021 with relation to enlargement on bail.

In the opinion of the Court, once a bail application is preferred then the same shall be considered with most expeditions strictly as per the law of the land without any delay.

Order Date :- 18.2.2025

A. Prajapati

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR PRAJAPATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad