Allahabad High Court
Chandan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 May, 2022
Bench: Umesh Kumar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12050 of 2022
Applicant :- Chandan And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar,Rakesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
Learnd counsel for the applicants submits that during pendency of the present application applicant no.1- Chandan has been arrested thus the application has been infructuous in respect of applicant no.1. Consequently the application has been pressed only for applicant no.2- Smt. Aneeta.
The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the cognizance order dated 15.11.2021 as well as charge-sheet dated 27.08.2021 filed in Case Crime No. 153 of 2021 under Section 504, 506 I.P.C., and Section 3(1) Da, Dha of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Mahrauni, District- Lalitpur and entire proceeding of S.T. No. 332 of 2021 (State Vs. Narendra and Others) with an alternative prayer to stay the further proceedings of the above mentioned case.
After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to surrender and move bail application, before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.
Considering the arguments of 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".
A seven judges Bench of this Court in the case 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 MOTO 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.
Further, as the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021 has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific directions need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court.
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 applies for bail before the Court below his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 23.5.2022
S.Verma
