Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 202002 (ALL)

RAJENDRA PRASAD YADAV v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER

A482/11786/2024 · 2025-10-16

Brij Raj Singh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11786 of 2024 Court No. - 16 HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. By means of this application preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has prayed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.2796 of 2015, subsequently changed as 5234 of 2016 filed under Section 190 Cr.P.C. as well as the summoning order dated 20.07.2019 and also the non-bailable warrant dated 30.09.2024 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)-III/ACJM, Faizabad. 3. After arguing at some length, counsel for the applicant says that he does not want press this application on merits and submits that applicant is ready to appear before the trial court and he will cooperate in the proceedings. He further submits that during the pendency of this application, non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant, therefore, some protection may be given to the applicant. He prays that the applicant may be granted the benefit of the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (AIR 2022 SC 3386). 4. It is, therefore, directed that in case the applicant surrenders before the trial court within three weeks from today and prefers bail application, the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Santosh Kr. Yadav Warsi, Ankur Yadav, Arjun Singh Yadav, Deepesh Kumar Yadav, Dheeraj Kumar Yadav, Rama Nand Yadav, Vikram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rajendra Prasad Yadav .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) trial court will decide the said bail application, as expeditiously as possible, taking into account the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra). Thereafter, the applicant may also move discharge application, which will be decided by the court below expeditiously. It is open for the applicant to raise all the pleas which are available with him. 5. For a period of three weeks from today, from today, execution of the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicant shall remain stayed. 6. The application stands disposed of. October 16, 2025 Rao/- A482 No. 11786 of 2024 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench