Allahabad High Court
Hari Om Shukla vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 20 September, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:60490
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8906 of 2023
Applicant :- Hari Om Shukla
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard Sri Surya Prakash, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nirmal Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with prayer to quash the summoning order dated 11.04.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3949/2023, arising out of charge sheet no. 275/2021 dated 28.07.2021 after the investigation of Case Crime No. 658/2020 under section 420 I.P.C. & Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 at Police Station Paliya, District Lakhimpur Kheri which is pending in the Court of 1st Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri and also to stay the summoning order dated 11.04.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3949/2023, arising out of charge sheet no. 275/2021 dated 28.07.2021 after the investigation of Case Crime No. 658/2020 under section 420 I.P.C. & Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act, 1955 at Police Station Paliya, District Lakhimpur Kheri which is pending in the Court of 1" Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri.
Counsel for the applicant contends that the chargehseet has been filed under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, whereas the case of the present applicant is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment rendered by this court in Criminal Misc.Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 Cr.P.C. bearing no. 4344 of 2021,(Daudayal Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others) and further in case of Lakshman Prasad and Another Vs. State of U.P., Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 Cr.P.C. No. 538 of 2021.
During course of his arguments, he has placed reliance on para nos. 4 & 5 of the case of Daudayal Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others (Supra), which are extracted hereinunder :-
"4. In view of above legal propositions the offence is not non-bailable. Cognizance of such an offence can be taken but in the absence of any other provisions showing the offence to be non-bailable, the offence would continue to be bailable in view of Schedule-II to the Code of the Criminal Procedure, 1973.
5.......
The above legal position is not clear to most of the Investigating Officers and the courts below and therefore, the bail application of the accused persons in such cases are rejected by the Magistrate and the special courts treating the offences to be non-bailable. Hence, it would be appropriate to protect the applicant's interest for limited period."
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material placed on record, it is evident that the chargesheet has been filed against the present applicant under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The coordinate Bench of this court has passed the order in Crl.Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application under section 438 Cr.P.C. bearing no. 4344 of 2021, wherein it has been held that offence under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, is not non-bailable and further held that cognizance of such an offence can be taken, but, in absence of any other provisions showing the offence to be non-bailable, the offence would continue to be bailable in view of the Scheduled-II to the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This court has further noticed the fact that during the course of the investigation, the present applicant was not arrested and thus his case is also covered with the ratio of the Judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Siddharth Vs. State of U.P., 2021 SCC Online SC, 615.
At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submits that he does not want to press the application and seeks liberty to file bail application before the learned trial court which may be decided in view of law laid by Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another (2022)10 SCC 51.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.
On due consideration to the submissions of learned counsel for the parties', it is provided that in case, the applicant appears before the trial court within three weeks from today and file bail application, the same shall be decided expeditiously in view of law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) and in the light of the observations made above.
The application is disposed of accordingly.
Order Date :- 20.9.2023/Mayank
