Disposed

Raj Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2025A482/5434/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicants sought quashing of a charge sheet and summoning order under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC. Counsel did not press the application on merits and confined the prayer to surrender and bail. The Court disposed of the application with a direction that any bail application be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil.

What did the court decide?

Application disposed of with direction that bail application upon surrender shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Raj Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38172

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5434 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Raj Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Case called out in the revised list. Nobody is present to press the application neither any request for adjournment of the case is made.

¶8

Sri Avishesh Kumar Singh, the learned A.G.A. is present.

¶9

Accordingly, the Court proceeds to examine the matter after perusing the record with the assistance of learned A.G.A.

¶10

By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicants have sought quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 08.08.2024 as well as the summoning order dated 12.02.2025 passed by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, District- Unnao in Case No. 2815 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 230 of 2024, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao as well as the entire proceedings thereof.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the aforesaid prayer and has submitted that while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C., this Court cannot go into the correctness of the allegations made against the applicants and has only to examine whether on the basis of the allegations made and material collected during investigation, the offences are made out against the applicants or not.

¶12

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.I. v. Aryan Singh, 2023

¶13

SCC Online SC 379 holds that while exercising the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the Court is not required to conduct a mini trial. It does not require the prosecution/investigating agency to prove the allegations. While exercising the powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C the Court has very limited jurisdiction and is required to consider "whether any sufficient material available to proceed further against the accused for which the accused is required to be tried or not".

¶14

Confronted with the aforesaid legal position, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicant may be permitted to surrender and move an application, before the court concerned seeking bail and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

¶15

Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of by observing that in case the applicant appears and files an application for his release on bail, the same shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, including the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. C.B.I., (2021) 10 SCC 773.

¶16

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 7.7.2025 -Amit K-

¶18

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

Raj Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. 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. Anjali Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Devesh Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Indrajeet Alias Nankhe Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kavit Kumar Singh @ Kavit Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Lal Bahadur Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Shiv Narayan Verma and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko and Another