SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Santosh Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 December, 2019


?Court No. – 66

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 43564 of 2019

Applicant :- Santosh Kumar

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Ganesh Shanker Srivastava,Deepak Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

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

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 3213 of 2018 (SectionState vs. Vijay Gupta), arising out of Case Crime No. 343 of 2018, under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Sungarhi, District- Pilibhit, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Polibhit as well as Charge-sheet No.290 of 2018 dated 21.10.2018 and cognizance order dated 5.2.2019 and all its consequential proceedings thereof.

At the very out-set learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant submits that he does not want to press the principal prayers seeking quashing of the charge sheet, cognizance order and the entire proceedings as have been made in the application nor is inclined to press the prayer seeking stay of the proceedings. He is ready to submit to the jurisdiction of the court, seek bail and accept all the conditions which this Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The only prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the hearing of the bail application may be done on the same day.

In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant, the application so far as it relates to seeking quashing of the charge sheet, cognizance order and the entire proceeding and so far as it relates to seeking stay of the proceeding, stands dismissed.

However, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

For a period of 30 days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.

With the aforesaid observations, this application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 6.12.2019/ Vikas



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation