Allahabad High Court
Pooran Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 November, 2022
Author: Gautam Chowdhary
Bench: Gautam Chowdhary
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 9094 of 2022 Petitioner :- Pooran Singh And 4 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Amrit Shanker Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This petitioner has been filed for quashing of the order dated 8.9.2022 passed by Sessions Judge, Firozabad in Criminal Revision No. 90 of 2022 (Pooran Singh and others Vs. State) and order dated 24.5..2022 passed by A.C.J.M. Shikohabad Firozabad in Criminal Case No. 2968 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 511 of 2017, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, P.S. Jasrana, District Firozabad.
On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the petitioners.
At this Court, in exercise of its power under Article 227 of Constitution of India., 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.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners No. 2,3,5 have 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 petitioners by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the petitioners.
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 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.
With the aforesaid observations, the petitioners is disposed off.
Order Date :- 3.11.2022 RPD