Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 32604 (ALL)

RAHUL SHARMA AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

A482/22946/2018 · 2025-10-07

Jai Prakash Tiwari

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22946 of 2018 Court No. - 85 HON'BLE JAI PRAKASH TIWARI, J. 1. The list has been revised. 2. None appears for the opposite party No. 2 and 3. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State. 4. By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court seeking quashing of the charge sheet dated 09.10.2017, the cognizance order dated 01.02.2018, and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 240 of 2018 arising out of Crime No. 598 of 2017 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the D.P. Act, Police Station Delhi Gate, District Aligarh, pending in the court of ACJM-IX, Aligarh. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that vide order of this Court dated 17.07.2018, the application in respect of applicant No. 1, Rahul Sharma, husband of opposite party No. 3, was disposed of with the direction that he shall appear and surrender before the court concerned within thirty days, failing which coercive action would follow. On the same order, interim protection was granted to applicant Nos. 2 to 4, being parents-in-law and brother-in-law of opposite party No. 3, directing that no coercive action shall be taken against them. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Rajiv Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Babita Upadhyay, G.A., Sanjeev Kumar Gaur Rahul Sharma And 3 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Learned counsel for the applicants clarified that he does not intend to press the prayer for quashing of the proceedings and confines his prayer only to a direction that the trial court may decide the bail application of the applicants No. 2 to 4 in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2021 (10) SCC 773. 7. Learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection to such a direction being given. 8. Accordingly, it is directed that if applicant Nos. 2 to 4 appear before the trial court within fifteen days from today and apply for bail, their application shall be decided by the court below strictly in accordance with the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra). 9. With the aforesaid direction this application is finally disposed of. October 8, 2025 Sumaira A482 No. 22946 of 2018 2 (Jai Prakash Tiwari,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMAIRA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad