CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench

Ajay Kumar Sahu and Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad High Court · Decided on 9 February 2011 · Citation: (2011) 02 AHC CK 0123

HON’BLE JUDGES
Bala Krishna Narayana, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Section 120B, 406, 420, 467, 468
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Revision No. 683 of 2011
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 372 words

Bala Krishna Narayana, J.—Learned Counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2.

This application in revision is directed against the order dated 20.01.2011 passed by C.M.M. Kanpur Nagar in Case No. 12030 of 2010 (State v. Ajay Kumar Sahu and others) by which the discharge application filed by the revisionists before him has been rejected.

3.

Learned Counsel for the revisionists submitted that from the submissions made on behalf of the revisionists, it was established that the revisionists have not committed any offence yet the Court below illegally refused to discharge the revisionists.

4.

After having examined the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the revisionists and perused the impugned order as well as other materials brought on record, I find that learned Magistrate after considering the respective submissions of the parties and the material collected during investigation came to the conclusion that there were sufficient grounds for proceedings against the revisionists under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 504, 506 I.P.C and the defence evidence of the revisionists was not liable to be considered at the stage of discharge.

5.

The view taken by the court below is based on settled principles of law and has not been demonstrated to be vitiated.

6.

The prayer for quashing the impugned order is refused.

8.

However, it is directed that the applicants shall appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided on the same day keeping in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and Anr. v. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon''ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case in applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

9.

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