HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 38121 of 2019
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar And 2 Ors
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr
Counsel for Applicant :- Mayank Srivastava,Manoj Kumar Bhatt
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Shreya Gupta, Advocate has filed her Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet no. 01 dated 13.05.2019 arising out of Case Crime No.0375 of 2018 and proceedings of criminal case no. 659 of 2019 (State Vs. Santosh Kumar), under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District -Allahabad pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.17, Allahabad.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that this matter may be referred to mediation and in paragraph no. 10 of the application, it is mentioned that mediation is possible in this case, while the said contention of learned counsel for the applicants has been vehemently opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 by contending that earlier vide order dated 9.10.2018 of the Division Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 28676 of 2018, matter was referred to mediation on the request of applicants, but they themselves did not appear in the mediation pursuant to direction given by the Division Bench of this Court, therefore, mediation between the parties concerned failed and this fact has been concealed by the applicants in the present application.
After advancing certain arguments at some length by the learned counsel for the applicants, when the Court put certain query to him, he gave up his challenge to the aforesaid impugned charge-sheet dated 13.05.2019 against the applicants and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicants to surrender before the concerned court below. The learned counsel for the applicants further stated at the Bar that he is not pressing any other prayer made in this application on merits and prayed that a direction may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously in accordance with law.
In view of above, the relief as sought by the applicants in the instant application is refused.
Considering the aforesaid prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that in case applicants appear before the concerned court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law keeping in view of the Seven Judges’ decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2005 Criminal Law Journal 755 as well as judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. (2009) 4 Supreme Court Cases, 437.
For the period of 30 days from today or till the date of appearance of the applicants before the concerned court below, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the above case.
With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
Order Date :- 23.10.2019
AK Pandey
