Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Kumar Tiwari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 July, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2950 of 2008
Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Tiwari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Smt. Nalini Jain
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
Application No.01 of 2022
1. This application seeks recall of the order dated 08.05.2019.
2. Heard.
3. It is stated that in the said order, Case No.2950 of 2008 has wrongly been transcribed as '2950 of 2019', which may be recalled.
4. The above-mentioned error appears to have been crept inadvertently and typographical one.
5. Hence, the order dated 08.05.2019 is hereby recalled.
6. The application stands disposed of.
On Memo
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 charge-sheet dated 24.09.2007 filed in Crime No. 64 of 1999, under Sections 13(1) D read with Sections 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 406, 409, 420, 468, 471, 504, 506 and 120-B IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Nagar Banda, District Banda and for quashing of proceedings of Case No.72 of 2007, pending in the Court of Special Judge (P.C. Act), Lucknow.
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 seven 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 :- 25.7.2022 MVS/-
