Allahabad High Court
Saroj @ Saroj Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And ... on 19 July, 2022
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4623 of 2022 Applicant :- Saroj @ Saroj Kumar And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Shri Mohan 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 Saroj @ Saroj Kumar, Indrajeet, Smt. Jaibasa, Smt. Pushpa Devi, Smt. Asha @ Sarita Devi and Dileep Kumar with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.03.2022 passed in Criminal Case No. 4460 of 2021, Crime No. 0141 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Charge-sheet No. 137 of 2021, dated 03.08.2021 as well as NBW order dated 02.06.2022 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4460 of 2021 (State vs. Saroj and others), Police Station Mahila Thana, District Bahraich, pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C. (Relation of against women crime), Bahraich.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the opposite party no.2 has lodged an F.I.R. against the applicants on the basis of false and concocted facts and the investigating officer of the case has also submitted the charge-sheet without investigating the allegations of the F.I.R. in right perspective and the trial Court has also taken the cognizance without dwelling deep into the material collected by the investigating officer.
It is further submitted that during the course of investigation the applicants had approached this Court by filing a Writ Petition (M/B) No. 20462 of 2021 and vide order dated 14.09.2021 passed therein, the matter was remitted to the Mediation Centre of this Court, however, unfortunately the mediation has failed.
It is also submitted mentioning various laws propounded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that when the whole family of the husband has been roped in, it primafacie reflect that the allegations are false and the case in this regard appears to be fit for quashing of the proceedings pending before the court below.
Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that the allegations of the F.I.R. has been investigated by the investigating officer and he has submitted the charge sheet on the basis of material/evidence collected and the trial Court has also taken the cognizance by passing a reasoned order and neither the submission of charge-sheet nor the process of taking cognizance and issuance of process may be termed as either illegal or irregular and all submissions which have been raised by learned counsel for the applicants are with regard to the factual aspects of the case which could not be dealt with in this jurisdiction, at this stage.
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 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 :- 19.7.2022 Praveen