Indra Bahadur Ad 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 13593 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 84
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12667 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Indra Bahadur Ad 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Radhe Shyam Gupta,Pradeep Kumar Srivastav
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

The argument of Sri Radhe Shyam Gupta, learned counsel for applicants, if accepted, it will akin to conduct a mini trial by this court, which is impossible.

It is the argument of learned counsel for applicants that there was an incident prior to present alleged occurrence where persons from applicants' side have received grievous injuries by the hands of opposite party side and only in order to make up a case, a false F.I.R. was lodged showing the alleged incident occurred after an hour on same day.

Learned counsel further submits that the nature of injuries received to applicants were so grievous that it could not possible for them to cause injuries as alleged by the complainant side in the latter alleged incident after an hour.

Considering above submissions, the Court perused the statement of injured witnesses recorded during investigation in the present F.I.R. wherein they have specifically narrated manner of occurrence and name of persons including applicants, who have assaulted them. There are injury report also which prima facie corroborate the statement of injured persons.

The Court in order to exercise powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot treat any F.I.R. or investigation to be false only on the basis of surmises and conjuncture. Under the inherent powers, the Court has to scrutinize to the extent whether prima facie case is made out or not and not to the extent whether after conclusion of trial, accused persons can be convicted or not.

At this stage, learned counsel pray that applicants are desirous to appear before the Court concerned and want to apply for bail and learned trial Court be directed to consider their bail application in accordance with law taking note of judgment of Supreme Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2021) 10 SCC 773.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if such a prayer of applicants are allowed.

In view of above, the prayers made in the application are rejected.

However, this application is disposed of with a direction that if the applicants appear before the Court concerned and apply for bail within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be considered in accordance with law and taking note of judgment of Supreme Court in Satendra Kumar Antil (supra) expeditiously.

Order Date :- 20.9.2022

Nirmal Sinha

(Sl.No. 15/543 fresh cases)