Allahabad High Court
Pushpendra Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 January, 2021
Author: Ajit Kumar
Bench: Ajit Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19428 of 2020 Applicant :- Pushpendra Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sriram Dhar Dubey Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J.
Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer clause of the present application.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the chargesheet dated 12.5.2020 abd cognizance order dated 29.9.2020 as well as the entire proceedings arising out of case no. 698 of 2020, case crime no. 10 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504 and 308 IPC, P.S. Belghat, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Basgaon, District Gorakhpur.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.
It is submitted that in respect of Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 452, 504 IPC, the applicant has already been enlarged on bail and now Section 308 has been added after investigation. It is next submitted that with respect to Section 308 IPC, the applicants want to surrender and apply for bail provided some breathing time is granted.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned AGA for the State have opposed the present application of the applicants. However, they have no objection in case court below pass the order if the applicants surrender and apply for bail.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants request that their plea for bail may be accepted and appropriate directions may be issued to the court below in that regard.
I do not see that any specific direction is needed to guide the discretion of Court to grant bail or to refuse it and no direction is equally needed to give any time frame as no exceptional circumstance has been referred to in the present facts of the case.
However, his plea for consideration of bail has been made with an undertaking that they shall appear before the court below within 45 days from today to show their genuineness on one hand and bonafide to co-operate with the trial on the other.
I hereby direct court concerned to consider the bail application on its own merit and dispose of the same keeping in view the principles laid down by the Full Bench of 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. In the interest of justice, it is hereby provided that keeping in view of the undertaking given on behalf of the applicants, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants for a period of 45 days from today in pursuance of the criminal proceedings in Case Crime No.10 of 2020 under Section 308 IPC.
This application, accordingly, stands disposed of.
It is made clear that in case the applicants does not abide by the undertaking given by his learned counsel, the interim protection, granted hereinabove, shall stand discharged and no further application shall be entertained for time extention, correction or modification of this order.
The order available on the official website of the High Court shall be taken to be correct and authentic one and due verification of the copy of the order supplied by the applicant shall be made from the official website of the High Court and note regarding the same by disposing of the bail, be given in the order.
Order Date :- 20.1.2021 Deepika