SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sweta Goswami & Another vs State Of U.P. & Another on 29 August, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?Court No. – 11

Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. – 5895 of 2019

Applicant :- Sweta Goswami Another

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Kunwer Dhananjay Singh,Deepshikha Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

Hon’ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the impugned charge sheet No. 01 of 2018 dated 14.11.2018 submitted in Case Crime No. 615 of 2018, under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506 and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Chinhat, District Lucknow, as well as the summoning order dated 11.07.2019 passed by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-III, Court No. 27, Lucknow in Case No. 22475 of 2019 (state vs. Abhishek Goswami and others), P.S. Chinhat, Lucknow.

After arguing the matter up to some length, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to surrender and move bail application, before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.

In view of above, it is provided that if the applicants surrender before the court below within thirty days from today, and apply for bail, their application for bail shall be considered and decided by the courts below in view of the settled law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Amrawati Another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290, as affirmed by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).

It is made clear that this order shall not be treated as an implied direction of this Court to grant bail to the applicants and the court concerned shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance to law.

Till the aforesaid period of thirty days, no coercive measures shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

In case, applicants fail to surrender before the Courts below, within the stipulated period of thirty days, they will not get benefit of this order.

With above directions this application stands disposed of.

Order Date :- 29.8.2019

S. Shivhare

 

 

Leave a Reply

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


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine


All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

Recent Comments

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2024 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