of 2013 Hon’ble Alok Singh, J Mr. M.C.…
Petition allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to raise grounds before the learned trial Magistrate.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C-482 No. 45 of 2013
Hon’ble Alok Singh, J
Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Rautela, AGA for the State/respondent no.1.
Mr. M.C. Kandpal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, submits that petitioner was never arrested during the investigation and now after filing of the charge-sheet, learned Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance against the present petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 IPC and 3/7 of Essential Commodities Act. Mr. M.C. Kandpal, learned Senior Counsel while placing reliance on the judgment of this Court, in the case of Hari Gupta & another vs. State of Uttarakhand & others in WPCRL No. 758 of 2013, decided on 26.06.2013 , argued that petitioner should not be arrested and sent to the judicial custody simply because charge-sheet is filed against the petitioner; he further submits that petitioner shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate, in compliance of summoning order dated 22.12.2012 (Annexure No.5), on or before 19.07.2013 and shall move an application seeking regular bail, therefore, learned Judicial Magistrate may be directed to decide the bail application, sympathetically, if possible, on the same day.
In the light of above, Mr. M.C. Kandpal, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this petition with liberty to raise all the factual and legal points before the learned trial Magistrate at the time of framing of charges seeking discharge.
Permitted to be withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. Petitioner shall appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate on or before 19.07.2013, in compliance of summoning order, as stated by Mr. M.C. Kandpal, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. S.S. Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner. In the event, of moving bail application, same shall be decided, sympathetically on the same day. In the event of fixing the future date for hearing and disposal of the bail application, applicant/petitioner shall be enlarged on interim bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate on furnishing his personal bond to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate concerned for the period till final decision is taken on the bail application.
Let copy of this order be forwarded to the concerned Magistrate, immediately.
(Alok Singh, J.) 01.07.2013
Sanjay
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to withdraw the petition before the High Court with liberty to raise grounds before the trial Magistrate.
Whether the petitioner should be arrested pending the disposal of the bail application under the charge-sheet.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Hari Gupta & another vs. State of Uttarakhand & othersReferred¶5
Hari Gupta & another vs. State of Uttarakhand & others in WPCRL No. 758 of 2013, decided on 26.06.2013
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
State
Alok Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
