Allahabad High Court
Vinod Kumar vs State Of U.P. & Another on 21 June, 2021
Bench: Rajeev Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 1840 of 2021
Applicant :- Vinod Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kunwar Ravi Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
The Court convened through video conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 24.06.2019 as well summoning order dated 04.12.2019 passed in Case No. 1950 of 2019 arising out of F.I.R. No. 84 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 427, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Bangarmau, District Unnao.
Learned counsel for applicant submits that the F.I.R., in the instant case, has been filed with mala fide intention and no offence as stated in the F.I.R. has been committed by the applicant. He further submits that the Investigating Officer of the case, without investigating the case properly, has submitted the charge sheet and the concerned Magistrate, without going into the depth of the matter, has summoned the applicant in a cursory way. He also submits that pendency of the instant criminal proceedings against the applicant are nothing but the abuse of the process of law and, therefore, the charge sheet as well as the summoning order whereby the applicant has been summoned be quashed.
Learned A.G.A., however, controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial and, therefore, the application is misconceived and liable to be dismissed.
Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against applicant and 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 prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble 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 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq & Another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843.
Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the Charge-sheet 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) and in Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 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 application should be decided, expeditiously.
In the recent judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SUO MOTU WRIT (CRL) No. (S) 1 of 2017 In RE: To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. vide its judgment and order dated 20.04.2021 has observed the common deficiencies which occurred in the proceedings of the criminal cases and approved "The Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2021" which is the part of the judgment in Chapter V Rule 17 of aforesaid Rules that the application for bail in non-bailable cases must ordinarily be disposed off within a period of 3 to 7 days from the date of first hearing. If the application is not disposed off within such period, the Presiding Officer shall furnish reasons thereof in the order itself.
In backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, the application is disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the applicant appears and surrender before the Court below within 30 days from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicant surrender and applies for bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by it alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked, before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 21.6.2021
VKS
