Disposed¶16

Prashant Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2025ABAIL/867/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC refused; applicant not pressed prayer on merit after charge-sheet and summons; surrender within two weeks and regular bail to be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922; no coercive action for two weeks or till surrender; IPC sections 419 420 467 468 471 406 506; P.S. Colonelganj Prayagraj; Allahabad High Court; Deepak Verma, J.; disposed 13.2.2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail refused; applicant permitted to surrender within two weeks and apply for regular bail, to be decided expeditiously per Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI; interim protection from coercive action for two weeks or until surrender, whichever is earlier. ¶16

Prashant Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶16

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Case Crime No. 07 of 2019 (Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 506 IPC), during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Court's answer

The relief of anticipatory bail sought by the applicant through the application is refused (counsel having not pressed the relief on merits).

¶12

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant surrenders before the concerned Court below within two weeks and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶14

Key takeaways

For two weeks from the date of order, or until the applicant surrenders before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. (No. 867 of 2025) by Prashant Shukla in Case Crime No. 07 of 2019 under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Colonelganj, District Prayagraj — after submission of charge-sheet and issuance of summons, and following disposal of his Section 482 application (order dated 21.07.2023), counsel for the applicant did not press the anticipatory bail prayer on merits and sought only a direction for expeditious decision of a regular bail application. The Court (Deepak Verma, J.) refused the anticipatory bail relief, directed that if the applicant surrendered within two weeks and applied for regular bail it be decided expeditiously in accordance with law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922, granted interim protection from coercive action for two weeks or till surrender (whichever earlier), and disposed of the application. Order dated 13.2.2025.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:20637

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 867 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Prashant Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajatshatru Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Sri Dharmendra Dhar Dubey, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record.

¶7

At the outset, learned counsel for the informant has raised objection that after submission of charge-sheet and issuance of summons, applicant filed Application U/S 482 No. 21421 of 2023 before this Court, which was decided by this Court vide order dated 21.07.2023, thereafter, the instant anticipatory bail application has been filed.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 07 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 506 IPC, Police Station- Colonelganj, District- Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the applicant has not pressed the relief as sought by means of this application on merit and prayed for issuance of appropriate direction to the concerned Courts below to decide the bail application of the applicant expeditiously.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have no objection in allowing the aforesaid prayer of the applicant.

¶12

Accordingly, the relief as sought by the applicant through this application is refused.

¶13

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it

¶14

is directed that if applicant surrender before the concerned Court below within two weeks from today and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another , reported in 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922.

¶15

For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the Court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.

¶16

With the aforesaid directions, this anticipatory bail application stands disposed of.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Aditya

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Prashant Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishal Yadav vs State of U.P.

Raja vs State of U.P.

Banarasi Yadav vs State of U.P.

Suman Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepak Kumar and 3 Others vs State of U.P.

Musahid and Another vs State of U.P. and Another