Allahabad High Court
Saroj Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 30 September, 2022
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7153 of 2022
Applicant :- Saroj Kumar And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pervesh Kumar Mishra,Noor Alam Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s) as well as learned Additional Government Advocate, representing respondent no. 1-State, and gone through the record.
2. By way of this application under Section 482 CrPC the applicant(s) has/have prayed for quashing of the charge-sheet dated 27.12.2019 filed in FIR No.0317 of 2019, Sessions Case No.691 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 325 IPC read with Sections 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Gha) Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act lodged at Police Station Itaunja, District 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 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 by 12th October, 2022 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 :- 30.9.2022
MVS/-
