Disposed

Nahar Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Feb 2025A482/589/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings and a summoning order arising from a charge-sheet against applicants not arrested. Prayer refused; counsel withdrew the application with liberty to seek regular bail in light of Satender Kumar Antil guidance.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal permitted; liberty to file regular bail application to be decided per Satender Kumar Antil category (A) guidance.

Nahar Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:16610

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 589 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Nahar Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalit Prakash,Narayan Swaroop Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

¶6

Sri Suraj Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Lalit Prakash, learned counsel for the applicants and Ms. Ladly Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.18889 of 2024, (State Vs. Nahar Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 204 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308, 452 of IPC, Police Station- Sakeet, DistrictEtah, as well as cognizance/ summoning order 19.09.2024, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Etah.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants were not arrested during the course of investigation and the charge-sheet have been submitted against them. It is further submitted that the offence is punishable up to 7 years imprisonment.

¶9

Upon considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants is, hereby, refused.

¶10

After some arguments, learned counsel for the applicants wants to withdraw the application with liberty to file a regular bail application before the court of competent jurisdiction.

¶11

In case bail application is filed by the learned counsel for the applicants, the same shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2022) 10 SCC 51 , wherein the Supreme Court considering the category(A) as mentioned in the paragraph no. 2, bail applications of such accused against which charge-sheet has been submitted on appearance may be decided

¶12

without the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. It has been observed that at the cost of repetition, we wish to state that, in category A, one would except a better exercise of discretion on the part of the court in favour of the accused.

¶13

The application stands disposed of with the aforesaid liberty.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Akram

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKRAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nahar Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nahar Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. 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

Similar cases

Sunil Sonkar vs State of U.P.

Smt Girja Devi and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Anita Devi vs State of Up and 6 Others

Suraj Pal and 4 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ambarish Alias Bijali Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohd Ahmad vs State of U.P. and Another