Allahabad High Court
Banne Khan And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 26 September, 2014
Bench: Amar Saran, Karuna Nand Bajpayee
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 17391 of 2014
Petitioner :- Banne Khan And 2 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- V.K. Agnihotry
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt.Advocate,Y.V. Pandey
Hon'ble Amar Saran,J.
Hon'ble Karuna Nand Bajpayee,J.
Sri Y.V. Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant filed vakalatnama on behalf of complainant which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Advocate and learned counsel for the complainant.
This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing of an FIR in case crime No. 456 of 2014, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Ijjatnagar, district Bareilly.
The writ court is not competent to go into questions of facts and on the allegations, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is disclosed.
Hence, no ground exists for quashing the FIR or staying the arrest of the petitioner.
However, in the circumstances of the case, it is provided that if the petitioners move an application for surrender before the court concerned within three weeks from today, the Magistrate concerned shall fix a date about ten days thereafter for the appearance of the petitioners and in the meantime release the petitioners on interim bail on such terms and conditions as the court concerned considers fit and proper till the date fixed for the disposal of the regular bail, which may as far as possible be decided in a maximum period of two months thereafter.
The court concerned shall also direct the Public Prosecutor to seek instructions from the investigating officer by the date fixed and as far as possible also give an opportunity of hearing to the informant and thereafter decide the regular bail application of the petitioner in accordance with the observations of the Full Bench of this Court in Amrawati and another Vs. State of UP, 2005 Cri. L.J 755, affirmed by the Supreme Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of UP,(2009) 4 SCC 437 and reiterated by the Division Bench of this Court in Sheoraj Singh alias Chuttan Vs. State of UP and others, 2009 (65) ACC 781.
If further instructions are needed or if adjournment of the case on the date fixed for hearing becomes unavoidable, the Court may fix another date, and may also extend the earlier order granting interim bail, if it deems fit provided that the adjournment of hearing of the regular bail on one or more dates should not exceed a total period of one month.
It will also be in the discretion of the Sessions/Special Judge concerned to consider granting interim bail pending consideration of the regular bail on similar terms as mentioned herein above when and if the petitioners apply for bail before him.
For a period of three weeks from today or till the petitioners appear/ surrender before the court below and apply for bail ( whichever is earlier), the petitioners shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case crime.
It is made clear that if the petitioners fail to appear before the court concerned for the purpose of applying for bail within the time allowed, no further extension will be given.
In case the petitioners fail to appear before the court concerned on the dates fixed or he fails to cooperate with the investigating officer during investigation, it will be open to the Public Prosecutor to move an application for cancelling the order of interim/final bail and the Court concerned may pass an appropriate order on merits.
With the aforesaid observations, this petition is disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.9.2014
Rkb
