Allahabad High Court
Shiv Mohit Tiwari And Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 6 August, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4812 of 2019
Applicant :- Shiv Mohit Tiwari And Ors.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Kushal Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dileep Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. By way of this application under Section 482 CrPC the applicant(s) has/have prayed for quashing of the charge-sheet no.02 of 2017 dated 13.03.2017 filed in FIR No.07 of 2017, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452 and 354 Kha IPC read with Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act and Sections 3(I)(X) and amended Sections 3(1)(Ba) (2) Da and Dha of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, lodged at Police Station Kurwar, District Sultanpur, for quashing of order dated 19.07.2017 by means of which the applicants have been summoned to face trial and for quashing of the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.118 of 2017 (State Vs. Virendra and others), pending in the Court of Special Judge, S.C.S.T. Act, Court No. 2, Sultanpur.
3. This Court is not satisfied that there is no evidence against the applicant(s) to support the charge-sheet. The evidence collected during the course of investigation does suggest commission of prima facia offence against the applicant(s).
4. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant(s) submits that this application may be disposed of with a direction to the learned Magistrate to consider bail application of the application in light of judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in (2022) 1 SCC 676 (Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. Through Director).
5 I have considered the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant(s) as well as the learned AGA, representing respondent-State.
6. The Supreme Court in Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. Through Director (supra) has inter alia held that if a person, who is an accused in a non-bailable/cognizable offence, was not taken into custody during the period of investigation, in such a case, it is appropriate that he may be released on bail as the circumstances of his having not been arrested during investigation or not being produced in custody is itself sufficient to entitle him to be released on bail.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant(s) has further submitted that in the present case the applicant(s) was/were not arrested during the course of investigation and he/they cooperated in the investigation. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that his/their arrest in pursuance to the impugned proceedings and his/their incarceration in jail merely because charge-sheet has been filed would be contrary to the governing principles for grant of bail, as observed by the Supreme Court in Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. Through Director (supra) as well as Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No.838/2021, 2021 SCC onLine SC 615)
8. In view of submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant(s), this application is disposed of with a direction to the applicant(s) to surrender before the trial Court within a period of 10 days from today and apply for regular bail and, if the applicant(s) does/do so, his/their bail application shall be considered in light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. Through Director as well as in Siddharth Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (supra).
Order Date :- 6.8.2022
MVS/-
