Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 119124 (ALL)

SUSHAMA AND 2 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. THRU.ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

NA528/37/2025 · 2025-01-29

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:5865 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37 of 2025 Applicant :- Sushama And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru.Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sourabh Rastogi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record. The present application has been filed for the following main relief:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Special Trial No. 2697 of 2024; State Versus Manish Yadav and others, arising out of Crime/F.I.R. no. 0439 of 2024, Under Section-64, 296, 115(2), 352 B.N.S. registered at Police Station- Mohanlalganj, District - Lucknow, Pending in the Court of Additional District And Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Lucknow, as well as impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 21.11.2024 under section 64(2)(m) wrongly mentioned as 65(2), 75(1), 115(2), 351(2), 352 of B.N.S. and section 3(1)(da) 3(1) (dha) SC/ST Act and charge sheet no. 01 of 2024 Dated 05.11.2024 submitted Under Section 115(2), 352, 64(2)(m), 351(2), 351(3), 75(1) of B.N.S. and section 3(1)(da), 3(1)(dha), 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act as well 51 & 6 of POCSO Act by the Investigation Officer against the applicants and other accused persons, as contained in Annexure no. 1 & 2 to this petition, in the interest of law and justice." After arguing at some length, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that liberty may be given to the applicants to file bail application before the trial court which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, (2022) 10 S.C.R. 351: (2022) 10 SCC 51 as also to prefer a discharge application before the court below and the same may be decided expeditiously. Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants. Keeping in view the aforesaid, the present application is disposed of with liberty as prayed for and with a direction to the court below that if the applicants apply for bail before the Court concerned, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Liberty is also granted to the applicants to move discharge application before the court below and the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Taking note of the facts of the case and also the observation made in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra), this Court is of the view that it would be appropriate to observe that it is expected from the Police Officer concerned that for a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, he would not take any coercive action against the applicants in the aforesaid case. With the aforesaid observations, the present application is disposed of. Order Date :- 29.1.2025/Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench