# Dinesh Kumar (In Jail) v. State of U.P - **Citation:** Crl. Misc. Ist Bail Application No. 38764 of 2017 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2020-03-03 - **Case number:** Crl. Misc. Ist Bail Application No. 38764 of 2017 - **Bench:** Sudhir Agarwal - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dinesh-kumar-in-jail-v-state-of-u-p-46249 - **Pages:** 2 ## Headnote Criminal Law-Indian Penal Code-1860-Section 307/149 & 302/149 - Appeal against conviction. Binding Precedent - The fact of the present case are different to facts of the case laws cited by the counsel for the parties. Therefore the ratio of the judgments cited is not applicable. Criminal Appeal rejected. (E-2) List of cases cited:- ## Text 3-5 All. Dinesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P. 1919 conditions of the lease and non performance of the land use for which land in question was leased out to the petitioner. 24. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to submit reply/explanation within period of four weeks from today and authority shall consider the reply of the petitioner and thereafter shall proceed to pass order afresh. The authority shall conclude the proceedings as directed hereinabove within a further period of eight weeks from the date of submission of reply of the petitioner. 25. We may, however, hasten to add and clarify that if any proceeding has been initiated by the authority under Section 27 of the Act No. 11 of 1973, that will be a separate one and it will be open for the authority to bring that to a logical end in the light of provisions prescribed for in that regards under the Act No. 11 of 1973. 26. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated hereinabove and subject to the aforesaid observations and directions but, with no order as to cost. ---------- (2020)03-05ILR A1919 ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 03.03.2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE SUDHIR AGARWAL, J. Crl. Misc. Ist Bail Application No. 38764 of 2017 Dinesh Kumar ...Applicant (In Jail) Versus State of U.P. ...Opposite Party Counsel for the Applicant: Sri Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay, Sri Ankit Saran, Sri Jai Narayan, Sri Rohan Gupta Counsel for the Opposite Party: A.G.A. A. Criminal Law- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961-Sections 498-A, 304-B- Section 3⁄4 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - application-adjournment-Counsel for applicant did not appear to arguethe applicant is in jail for 3 years- counsel did not show any interest to argue the matter.(Para 2) The matter is adjourned. (E-6) (Delivered by Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.) 1. A request has been made by Sri Rohan Gupta, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ankit Saran, learned counsel for applicant to adjourn this matter today. 2. This bail application is pending since 2017 and applicant is in jail since 20.10.2016. It appears that learned counsel for last more than three years did not make any attempt to argue the case but allowed detention of his client in jail. Even today, he did not show any interest by arguing the matter. He does not want to give a chance to his client to celebrate Holi at his residence. 3. Under these circumstances, I have no option but to adjourn this matter for today. 4. List in the next cause list. ---------- 1920 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES (2020)03-05ILR A1920 APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL SIDE DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.05.2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE B. AMIT STHALEKAR, J. THE HON'BLE ALI ZAMIN, J. Criminal Appeal No. 328 of 2001 Diwari Lal & Ors. ...Appellants(In Jail) Versus State of U.P. ...Respondent Counsel for the Appellants: Sri Ashwini Kumar Awasthi, Sri Ajay Vikram Yadav, Sri Manish Tiwari, Sri Vimlendu Tripathi Counsel for the Opposite Party: A.G.A., Sri Rajesh Yadav, Sri Vipin Kumar Yadav Criminal Law-Indian Penal Code-1860-Section 307/149 & 302/149 - Appeal against conviction. Binding Precedent - The fact of the present case are different to facts of the case laws cited by the counsel for the parties. Therefore the ratio of the judgments cited is not applicable. Criminal Appeal rejected. (E-2) List of cases cited:- 1. Pala Singh and others Vs St. of Pun., (1972) 2 SCC 640 2. Criminal Appeal no. 2525 of 1978, Chhotey Lal and others Vs St. of U.P. reported in 1990 (2) Crimes (HC) 531 3. Bhajan Singh Alias Harbhajan Singh Vs St. of Har., (2011) 7 SCC 421 4. 1998 SCC (Crl) 1055, Shiekh Ayub Vs St.of Maha 5. Waman and others Vs St. of Maha., (2011) CrLJ 4287 (SC) 6. Gangabhavani v. Rayapati Venkat Reddy, AIR 2013 SC 3681 7. Yogendra Morarji Vs St. of Guj., (1980) 2 SCC 218 8. Moti Singh Vs St. of Maha., (2002) 9 SCC 494 9. Vajrapu Sambayya Naidu and others Vs St. of A.P. and Others, (2004) 10 SCC 152 10. (2014) 5 SCC 744, St. of Raj. Vs Manoj Kumar 11. Kashi Ram and others Vs St. of M.P., (2002) 1 SCC 71 12. Bhawar Singh and Ors Vs St. of M.P., (2008) 16 SCC 657 13. Munshi Ram Vs Delhi Administration, AIR (1968) SC 702 14. Rajinder and others Vs St. of Har., (1995) 5 SCC 187 15. Abid Vs St. of U.P., 2009 (66) ACC 737 (SC) 16. Avtar Singh Vs St.of Har., 2012 (79) ACC 699 17. Asraf Ali Vs St. of Assam, (2008) 16 SCC 328 18. Shardul Singh Vs. St. of Har. (2002) 8 SCC 372 19. Ravindra Kumar Vs. St. of Punj., (2001) 7 SCC 690, 20. St. of U.P. Vs. Baburam (2000) 4 SCC 515 21. Thaman Kumar Vs. St. of UT of Chandigarh, (2003) 6 SCC 380, 22. Yunis alias Kariya Vs. St. of M.P. (2003) 1 SCC 425, 23. (1973) 3 SCC 219 (Shivaji Genu Mohite Vs. St. of Maha.) 24. (2017) 11 SCC 120 (Rajagopal Vs. Muthupandi alias Thavakkalai and Others) 25. St. of U.P. Vs M.K. Anthony, (1985) 1 SCC 505, 26. Gangabhavani v. Rayapati Venkat Reddy, AIR 2013 SC 3681