Allahabad High Court
Zubair And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 March, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42800 of 2022
Applicant :- Zubair And 7 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Gopal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants to quash the entire proceedings as well as charge sheet and cognizance/ summoning order dated 22.3.2021 in Case No. 4820 of 2022, Case Crime No. 10 of 2020, (State Vs. Zubari and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 147, 354 IPC. P.S. Bithrichainpur, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, IIIrd Bareilly.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.
From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court 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 Supreme Court in 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 and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283. The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge under Section 239 or 227/228 Cr.P.C. as the case may be, before the court below and he is free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case, summoning order/Cognizance order as well as charge sheet is hereby refused.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicant in view of the judgment in the case Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicant approach the trial court for bail, the trial court shall definitely follow the directions given in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).
However, considering the nature of the allegations made in the F. I. R. and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court concerned and applies for bail, the same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (Supra).
With the above directions, this application u/s 482 is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 1.3.2023/A.
