Karuna Shankar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Karuna Shankar vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the applicant to file a bail application before the trial court; direction to the court below to consider and decide any such bail application expeditiously in accordance with law; expectation that no coercive action will be taken against the applicant for 30 days or till he applies for bail, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Crl. Case/S.S.T. No. 547 of 2025 (State of U.P. Versus Karuna Shankar), arising out of Complaint Case No. 281/2023 under Sections 18/27 of the Drug & Cosmetics Act, 1940, and the summoning order dated 09.01.2023 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao, should be set aside/quashed. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

The application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for, i.e., to file a bail application before the trial court, and the court below is directed that if the applicant applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

Taking note of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) and Musheer Alam (supra), it is expected that the Police Officer/Court concerned will not take any coercive action against the applicant for a period of 30 days from the date of the order or till the applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier, and no application shall be entertained in this regard.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by Karuna Shankar seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Crl. Case/S.S.T. No. 547 of 2025 (State of U.P. Versus Karuna Shankar), arising out of Complaint Case No. 281/2023 under Sections 18/27 of the Drug & Cosmetics Act, 1940 (P.S. Asiwan, District Unnao), and of the summoning order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Saurabh Lavania, J.), relying on Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51, and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine, disposed of the application with liberty to the applicant to file a bail application before the trial court, directed the court below to decide any such bail application expeditiously in accordance with law, and observed that no coercive action is expected against the applicant for 30 days from the date of the order or till he applies for bail, whichever is earlier, with no application to be entertained in that regard.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:45219

Court No. - 11

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6359 of 2025

Applicant :- Karuna Shankar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Misra,Jyoti Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):-

"WHEREFORE, it is most humbly and respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside/quash the entire proceedings of Crl. Case/S.S.T. No. 547 of 2025 (State of U.P. Versus Karuna Shankar) arising out of Complaint Case No. 281/2023, Under Section-18/27 of Drug & Cosmetics Act, 1940 pertaining to Police Station-Asiwan, District-Unnao and impugned summoning order dated 09.01.2023 passed by the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Unnao by which the applicant/petitioner has been summoned for facing of trial under the aforesaid section, as contained in Annexure No.1 to this petition, in the interest of justice."

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 Satender Kumar Antil versus 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 .

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

Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty 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.

Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observation 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/Court 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 applicant in the aforesaid case. It is made clear that in this regard no application shall be entertained.

With the aforesaid observations, the present application is disposed of.

Order Date :- 5.8.2025

ML/-

Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench