Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Ravi @ Sushant vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 32
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6370 of 2018 Applicant :- Ravi @ Sushant Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Baijant Kumar Mishra,Shiv Shankar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This Crl. Misc. application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the impugned judgment and order dated 8.10.2012 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No.26, Deoria, in S.T. No.223 of 2010 arising out of case crime no.395 of 2009, under section 376 IPC, P.S. Bankta, District Deoria with further prayer to direct the court below to accept the fresh bail bond to the applicant in aforesaid case crime.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that with false allegation first information report was lodged. Earlier applicant was released on bail under section 366 and 363 IPC in case crime no.395 of 2009, P.S. Bankta, District Deoria. Subsequently section 376 IPC was added hence direct the court below to accept the fresh bail bond to the applicant in aforesaid case crime. Alternative prayer is to issue direction for consideration of the bail application expeditiously, in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Amarawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004(57) ALR-390 and by the Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2009 (4) SCC 437.
Learned AGA opposed aforesaid prayer.
Considered the submission of counsel for the parties. The court concerned, where proceeding is pending, is expected to scrutinize the material carefully so any innocent person is not harassed, prosecuted and held guilty. Since the disputed question of facts requires appreciation of evidence hence at this initial stage it is not a fit case for interference under section 482 Cr.P.C.
As far as expeditious disposal of the bail application is concerned, no such direction is required. However, in view of the aforesaid facts, if the applicant appears before the courts below within three weeks from today and applies for bail, it is expected that the same will be considered and disposed off, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
For a period of three weeks no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
Accordingly, present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby disposed off.
Order Date :- 28.2.2018 Pramod
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Ravi @ Sushant vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2018
Judges
  • Arvind Kumar Tripathi
Advocates
  • Baijant Kumar Mishra Shiv Shankar Tiwari