Disposed¶13

Imran v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2025NABAIL/1684/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Imran v. State of U.P.; Allahabad High Court (Deepak Verma, J.); anticipatory bail; Section 482 BNSS; Sections 323, 325, 504, 352, 452, 308 IPC; Case Crime No.212 of 2024; P.S. Nehtaur, District Bijnor; anticipatory bail prayer not pressed and refused; surrender within three weeks; expeditious disposal of regular bail application; Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 922; interim protection from coercive action; application disposed of 5.3.2025.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail refused; alternative relief granted in the form of (i) interim protection - no coercive action for three weeks or till surrender, whichever is earlier, and (ii) a direction that the regular bail application be decided expeditiously in accordance with Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation. ¶13

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶13

Issue for consideration

Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant Imran in Case No.18901 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.212 of 2024 (Sections 323, 325, 504, 352, 452, 308 IPC, P.S. Nehtaur, District Bijnor). +1 more

¶7

Court's answer

The relief of anticipatory bail sought through the application is refused, learned counsel having not pressed the prayer on merits and having confined himself to an alternative prayer.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

If the applicant surrenders before the concerned court below within three weeks and applies for regular bail, the bail application shall be decided expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation.

¶11

Key takeaways

For a period of three weeks from the date of the order, or until the applicant surrenders before the court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against him.ratio¶12

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS (A.B. Application No.1684 of 2025) by Imran in Case No.18901 of 2024 / Case Crime No.212 of 2024, Sections 323, 325, 504, 352, 452, 308 IPC, P.S. Nehtaur, District Bijnor: at the hearing, counsel for the applicant did not press the anticipatory bail prayer on merits and sought instead a direction for expeditious disposal of his regular bail application, to which the A.G.A. had no objection. The Court refused the anticipatory bail relief, directed that if the applicant surrendered within three weeks and applied for regular bail the application be decided expeditiously in accordance with the law laid down in Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2021 SCC OnLine SC 922), and ordered that for three weeks or till surrender, whichever was earlier, no coercive action be taken against him. Application disposed of. (Deepak Verma, J.; order dated 5.3.2025.)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:31003

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1684 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Imran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The instant Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with a prayer to grant an anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case No.18901 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No.212 of 2024, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 352, 452, 308 IPC, Police Station- Nehtaur, District- Bijnor.

¶8

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.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in allowing the aforesaid prayer of the applicant.

¶10

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

¶11

Considering the aforesaid alternative prayer of the applicant, it is directed that if applicant surrenders before the concerned Court below within three 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.

¶12

For the period of three 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.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 5.3.2025

¶15

SKD

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Imran v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imran 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

Ashish Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Manoj Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Mathura Prasad vs State of U.P. and Another

Mantu Singh @ Rajesh Singh vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Kumar Chauhan vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepesh Upadhyaya vs State of U.P.