Disposed

Balram Krishna v. State of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Jul 2025A482/5370/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A S.482 CrPC application sought quashing of a summoning order in a complaint case under S.420 IPC. Instead of deciding quashing, the court disposed of it granting liberty to apply for bail and file a discharge application before the trial court, with a direction for expeditious decision and no coercive action for 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to apply for bail and file discharge application before trial court; bail and discharge to be decided expeditiously; no coercive action by police for 30 days or until bail applied.

Balram Krishna Vs State of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37381

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5370 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Balram Krishna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap,Saad Husain,Shashank Shekhar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶6

Shri Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no 2, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record as well as Shri Vinay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

¶8

The present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (now 528 of B.N.S.S.) by the applicant with the following prayer:-

¶9

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the summoning order 06.06.2023 in complaint case no. 232/2018 , U/S 420 IPC at PS Ramkot District Sitapur. A true certified copy annexed herewith the petition as a annexure no. 1. "

¶10

After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicant to file bail application before the trial court which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satendra 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 as also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may be decided expeditiously.

¶11

Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 BNSS is disposed of with liberty

¶13

as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicant applies for bail before the Court concerned, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

¶14

Liberty is also granted to the applicant to move discharge application before the court below and the same shall be decided expeditiously, in accordance with law, if there is no any other legal impediment.

¶15

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observations made 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 applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier, he would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.7.2025 Ashish

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Balram Krishna v. State of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram Krishna v. State of U.P. Thru Sec. Home Deptt. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sanyogita Upadhyay and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Sarvar Jahan Vs Mujeeb Ahmad and 3 Others

Naveen Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Juvenile X Thru. His Natural Guardian /Mother Y Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Shan Saleem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Janardan Datta Singh vs Mrs. Kritika Jyotsana Distt. Magistrate Sultanpur