Shrimati Jagpati and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shrimati Jagpati and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home 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, which shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law; the police officer/court concerned not to take coercive action for 30 days or till the bail application, whichever is earlier. The prayer to quash the summoning order and proceedings was not granted; the application was disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether to quash the summoning order dated 28/04/2025 and the entire proceedings of Complaint No. 14/2024, or instead grant the applicant liberty to file a bail application before the trial court. +1 more

Court's answer

The present Section 482 application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for, i.e. liberty to file a bail application before the trial court, with a direction to the court below that if the applicant applies for bail, the prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

Taking note of the observations in Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) and Musheer Alam (supra), it is observed/expected that the Police Officer/Court concerned will not take any coercive action against the applicant for a period of 30 days or till the applicant applies for bail, whichever is earlier; it is made clear that in this regard no application shall be entertained.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow), Saurabh Lavania, J. — APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 7288 of 2025, Shrimati Jagpati and 6 others v. State of U.P. (Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.) and another. The applicants sought quashing of the summoning order dated 28/04/2025 and the entire proceedings arising out of Complaint No. 14/2024 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Haidarganj, District Ayodhya, passed by the Learned Additional Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Ayodhya. After argument, counsel sought only liberty to file a bail application before the trial court, to be decided in view of the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2022) 10 SCC 51 : (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351 and Musheer Alam v. State of U.P., 2025 SCC OnLine; the learned AGA raised no objection. The application was DISPOSED OF with that liberty, with a direction that if the applicant applies for bail, the prayer shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Further observing the cited Supreme Court precedents, the Court recorded that the police officer/court concerned is expected not to take any coercive action against the applicant for 30 days or till the bail application, whichever is earlier, and that no application shall be entertained in that regard.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7288 of 2025

Shrimati Jagpati And 6 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Akhil Kumar Singh, Gyanendra Pratap Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 11

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):-

"it is most respectfully prayed that in the interest of justice this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the Summoning order dated 28/04/2025, along with entire proceeding arising out of Complaint No 14/2024 dated 28/04/2005, passed by Learned Additional Judicial Magistrate 2nd Ayodhya, on the basis of the complaint No. 14/2024, Under Section-452,323,504,506 IPC, at P.S.- Haidarganj District- Ayodhya in the interest of justice.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the Summoning order dated 28/04/2025, along with entire proceeding arising out of complaint no 14/2024 dated 28/04/2005,, passed by Learned Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Ayodhya, on the basis of the complaint No. 14/2024, Under Section-452,323,504,506 IPC, at P.S.- Haidarganj, DistrictAyodhya 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

A482 No. 7288 of 2025

2

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.

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

September 2, 2025 Anurag

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench