Allahabad High Court
Avanish And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And ... on 20 September, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6570 of 2022 Applicant :- Avanish And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants namely Avanish, Sarvesh Singh, Divari and Sonu Singh with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet no.80 of 2021 dated 07.03.2021 and summoning order dated 09.06.2022 passed in Case No.12055 of 2022 (State Vs. Sonu Singh & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.46 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 324, 325, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Harpalpur, District Hardoi as well as further proceedings of the above mentioned case pending before the court below.
Learned counsel for the applicants has made many factual submissions to demonstrate that the FIR was lodged on false and concocted facts just to pressurize and harass the applicants and the Investigating Officer without going deep into the matter in a cursory manner has submitted the charge-sheet, and the Court below has also taken cognizance without considering the matter in right perspective and, therefore, the Charge-sheet, the order of the Magistrate, whereby the cognizance has been taken and process is issued are bad in law and the same be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. while controverting the arguments of the learned counsel for applicants submits that, the arguments of the learned counsel for applicants is, with regard to the factual aspects of the case which cannot be gone into by this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances and keeping in view the order intended to be passed, the service of notice on opposite party no.2 is hereby dispensed with.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against applicants. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only primafacie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq, another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843 and lastly State of Gujrat Vs Afroz Mohammed Hasanfatta reported in MANU/SC/0139/2019 .
Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the Charge-sheet, summoning order as well as all proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby refused.
A seven judges Bench of this Court in the cases of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC), Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017, In Re: To issue certain Guidelines Regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in Criminal Trials v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, MANU/SC/0292/2021 and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773 have given various directions to criminal Courts for expeditious disposal of Bail applications. The ratio of above mentioned decisions is quite clear that, in the backdrop of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the personal liberty of a person is at stake, the bail applications should be decided, expeditiously.
In the backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the request of learned counsel for the applicants, the application is disposed of with direction to the trial Court that if the applicants appear and surrender before the Court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the Court below strictly in accordance with the law referred to herein above.
If the opposite party no.2 feels aggrieved by this order, she/he may approach this Court by moving an appropriate application.
Order Date :- 20.9.2022 Anupam S/-