Birendra Kumar Choudhary Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supply Lko.and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Birendra Kumar Choudhary Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Food and Civil Supply Lko.and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the applicant to surrender before the trial court within three weeks and prefer a bail application; direction to the trial court to decide the bail application expeditiously in light of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) and to decide any subsequent discharge application expeditiously; no coercive action against the applicant for a period of three weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated Nil, complaint case no. 48 F / 2002, the summoning order dated 14.2.2002 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Complaint Case no. 48F/02 arising from the First Information Report should be quashed under Section 482.

Court's answer

The application was not pressed on merits; the applicant was to surrender before the court below within three weeks and prefer a bail application, which the trial court was directed to decide as expeditiously as possible taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra); thereafter the applicant may move a discharge application, also to be decided expeditiously by the court below.

Ratio / Principle

Interim protection: for a period of three weeks from the date of the order, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

Key takeaways

The Section 482 application stands disposed of, having been not pressed on merits by learned counsel for the applicant.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Brij Raj Singh, J., Order dated October 16, 2025 in Application U/S 482 No. 8793 of 2025 (Birendra Kumar Choudhary v. State of U.P. and others): The applicant sought quashing of a chargesheet dated Nil submitted by Inspector Food Circle-Barai Jalalpur, complaint case no. 48 F / 2002 (State Vs. B.K. Choudhary Manager, Parag Dairy Sitapur & another) and the summoning order dated 14.2.2002, along with all proceedings arising from the FIR. Counsel did not press the application on merits and instead sought the benefit of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (AIR 2022 SC 3386). The Court disposed of the application, directing that if the applicant surrenders before the court below within three weeks and prefers a bail application, the trial court shall decide it as expeditiously as possible in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil (supra); the applicant may thereafter move a discharge application, to be decided expeditiously. For three weeks, no coercive action was to be taken against the applicant.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8793 of 2025

Birendra Kumar Choudhary

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Food And Civil Supply Lko.And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ajai Kumar Srivastava, Rajesh Kumar Lodhi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 16

HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J.

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

The present application has been filed with the following prayers:

"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed to this Hon'ble Court maykindly be pleased to quash the Chargesheet dated Nil submitted by Inspector Food Circle-Barai Jalalpur i.e. Opp. Partyno.3andquashcomplaint case no. 48 F / 2002 and to quash summoning order dated-14.2.2002 and entire Proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case no. 48F/02 (State Vs. B.K. Choudhary Manager, Parag Dairy Sitapur & another contained as Annexure No. 1 & 2 respectively.

It is further prayed to Hon'ble Court may please further and quash entire proceedings arising out from said First Information Report and pending before the Learned Trial Court."

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merits. However, he submits that the applicant will surrender before the trial court and apply for bail. He prays that the applicant may be granted the benefit of the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (AIR 2022 SC 3386).

A482 No. 8793 of 2025

2

It is, therefore, directed that in case the applicant surrenders before the Court below within three weeks from today and prefers bail application, the trial court will decide the said bail application, as expeditiously as possible, taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). Thereafter, the applicant may also move discharge application, which will be decided by the court below expeditiously.

For a period of three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

The application stands disposed of .

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

October 16, 2025 Sachin

Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench