Allahabad High Court
/10523/2025 of VAKIL AHMAD Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER on 12 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10523 of 2025 Court No. - 29 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Tanvi Jain, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No. 1, as well as Shri Saurabh Yadava, learned
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10523 of 2025
Court No. - 29
HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard Shri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Dr. Tanvi Jain, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party No. 1, as well as Shri Saurabh Yadava, learned counsel for the Union of India-opposite party No.2 and perused the record.
2. This application has been filed for quashing of summoning order dated 03.03.2000 passed by learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bahraich, in Complaint Case No. 1927 of 2000 (Union of India Vs. Vakeel and another), Police Station D.R.D.I., District Lucknow, as well as entire proceeding of the above mentioned case.
3. On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the complaint disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material available on record.
4. This Court in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.
5. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.
6. As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021), has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Manoj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Dheeraj Srivastava Vakil Ahmad .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)
statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific direction need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex court.
7. With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off. December 12, 2025 Mustaqeem A482 No. 10523 of 2025 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench