Allahabad High Court
Rajneesh Alias Rajnees Kumar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 31 May, 2022
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 11
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3359 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajneesh Alias Rajnees Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Santosh Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate-I for the State.
In view of the proposed order, notice to opposite party no.3 is hereby dispensed with.
By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings of Special Session Trial No.148 of 2022, arising out of Charge-sheet No.280 of 2021 dated 03.09.2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506 & 427 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (d), 3 (1) (dha), 3 (2) 5a of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station-Mitauli, District-Lakhimpur Kheri, which is pending in the Court of IInd Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District-Lakhimpur Kheri.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the present petitioner has been falsely implicated in aforesaid criminal case as he has not committed any offence as alleged.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was not arrested during investigation and he has co-operated with the investigation and further he shall co-operate with the trial proceedings.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that during investigation the petitioner has not been arrested, therefore, he placed reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court dated 02.09.2021 in re; Aman Preet Singh vs. C.B.I. through Director, Criminal Appeal No.929 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5234/2021), wherein the Apex Court has considered the decision of Delhi High Court in re; Court on its own Motion vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2004) 72 DRJ 629, wherein the guideline was formulated that if any accused person has not been arrested during investigation and has co-operated with the investigation, there is no need to arrest him after filing charge sheet, particularly, if the nature of offences is not so serious. In the aforesaid judgment, the Apex Court has considered its own judgment in re; Siddharth vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr., Criminal Appeal No.838 of 2021 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5442/2021), whereby the Apex Court considering the observation of the well celebrated judgment in re; Joginder Kumar vs. State of U.P. & Ors, (1994) 4 SCC 260, has observed that the arrest is not mandatory in all cases and if the accused person is co-operating with investigation, there is no need to arrest. The Apex Court in re; Siddharth (supra) has also considered one aspect that if accused person has not been arrested during investigation, there would be no need to arrest him after filing charge sheet, if it is not so warranted. The Apex Court in re; Aman Preet Singh (supra) has directed all the High Courts to circulate the judgment passed in re; Siddharth (supra) for its compliance.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, the prayer for quashing the charge sheet as well as the criminal proceedings of S.S.T. No.148 of 2022 is hereby refused at this stage. However, learned trial court is directed to consider the bail application of the applicant/ petitioner, if possible on the same day, in the light of aforesaid cases i.e. Siddharth (supra) and Aman Preet Singh (supra), if the applicant/ petitioner surrenders before the learned trial court concerned within three weeks and file the application for bail.
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 31.5.2022 [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
Suresh/
