Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 67058 (ALL)

VIRENDRA KUMAR ALIAS BABLU SRIVASTAVA AND 3 OTHERS v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/23612/2025 · 2025-08-04

Dinesh Pathak

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131770 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23612 of 2025 Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Alias Bablu Srivastava And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajnish Kumar Pandey,Santosh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J. 1. Compliance affidavit filed by the learned AGA today in Court is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the complainant (Opposite Party No. 2) as well as learned A.G.A. representing State-opposite party No. 1 and perused the record on Board. 3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceeding including the summoning order dated 8.4.2025 in Complaint Case No. 162 of 2023 (Jhamman Lal vs. Bablu Srivastava @ Virendra Kumar and others), under Sections 323, 324, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5A) SC/ST Act, Police Station Banna Devi, District Aligarh, pending before Special Judge SC/ST Act, Aligarh. 4. As per the medical report, severe injuries were caused to the complainant, respondent No. 2, namely, Jhamman Lal, which has been substantiated by the statement of the doctor, who has medically examined the injured. 5. After due deliberations at length, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that he is not pursuing the instant application on merits. He has further submitted that the present applicants are willing and ready to co-operate with the courts below and participate in the court proceedings provided some interim protection may be granted to them. It is next submitted that the present applicants have never intended to ignore the court proceedings. 6. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the contesting- opposite party No. 2 has no objection if interim protection is granted to the present applicants to enable them to appear before the court below. 7. In this conspectus, as above, no useful purpose would be served to keep this matter pending, therefore, this Court deems it appropriate to finally dispose of the present application, without making any observation on the merits of the case as mentioned in the present application, with a direction that the present applicants, in case, appear/surrender and move a bail application before the court below within a period of three weeks from today along with a certified copy of this order, the same shall be considered and decided by the court concerned in accordance with law expeditiously, preferably, within a period of three weeks thereafter. 8. For a period of six weeks or till the decision on the bail application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the present applicants. 9. As such, instant application is finally disposed of. Order Date :- 5.8.2025 vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad