Allahabad High Court
Amar Singh Yadav And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 6 September, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6076 of 2022
Applicant :- Amar Singh Yadav And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Affairs And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
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.01 of 2022 dated 30.04.2022 filed in Crime/FIR No.0097 of 2022, under Sections 308, 354 Kha, 504, 506 and 325 IPC read with Sections 3(2)Va, 3(1)Da, 3(1)Dha and 3(1)W of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act lodged at Police Station Pisanwa, District Sitapur and for quashing of the entire proceedings of Special Trial No.171 of 2022, pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC & SC Act, District Sitapur.
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 facie 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 applicant(s) 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, the 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 :- 6.9.2022
MVS/-
