Allahabad High Court
Deepu And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 10 November, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7983 of 2022 Applicant :- Deepu And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prashansa Singh,Sushant Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Ms. Arunima Shukla, learned counsel holding brief of Ms. Prashansa Singh, 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 Deepu, Ashish Kumar and Sonu with the prayer to quash/set aside the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.507 of 2021 (State Vs. Deepu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.0073 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 452, 506, 308, 336, 188, 269 I.P.C. & Section 3 of the Mahamari Adhiniyam, 1897 and Section 51 of the Aapda Prabandhan Adhiniyam, 2005, Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur pending before the court of First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.1, sultanpur as well as impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 05.04.2021 along with charge sheet filed therein.
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 of the case and keeping in view the order intended to be passed, issuance of notice to the 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.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 and In Re: To issue certain Guidelines Regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in Criminal Trials v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, MANU/SC/0292/2021, 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.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773 has issued various guidelines and provided a scheme with regard to the cases where the Charge Sheet has been filed without arrest of the accused person(s) during investigation and accused person(s) have Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before the Investigating Officer whenever called. Apex Court has also provided special procedure with regard to such cases where the charge sheet has been submitted under offences punishable with up to seven years of imprisonment.
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 :- 10.11.2022 Anupam S/-