Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Ishraq And Ors vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home ... on 10 August, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6518 of 2017
Applicant :- Mohd. Ishraq And Ors
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Ors.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Piyush Shrivastava,Sanjeev Kumar Singh
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 dated 27.08.2017 filed in Crime No.0196 of 2016, under Sections 3(1) of The U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act lodged at Police Station Zaidpur, District Barabanki, for quashing of the order dated 11.09.2017 by means of which the applicants have been summoned to face trial and for quashing of the proceedings of Gangster Case No. 18 of 2017 (State Vs. Izhar and others), pending in the Court of Special Judge, Gangsters Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.9 Barabanki.
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).
After the applicants are admitted to bail, they may move application for discharge, which shall be decided by the learned trial Court expeditiously.
Order Date :- 10.8.2022 MVS/-
