Allahabad High Court
Anil Sharma vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 22 September, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:61172
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9208 of 2023
Applicant :- Anil Sharma
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesha Nand Pandey,Alok Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Girijesh Kumar Dwivedi, 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 Chargesheet No. 27 of 2021, dated 24-02-2021 as well as cognizance order taken upon the chargesheet, arising out of Case Crime No. 0200/2019, under section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, Police Station-Ahirauli, District-Ambedkar Nagar, in Crl. Case No. 13240 of 2021(State Vs. Anil Sharma) pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar.
Factual matrix of the case is that an information was received that certain black marketing of the kerosene oil is being done at the fair price shop of the applicant and thereafter, the first information report was lodged. The investigation was done and chargesheet was filed in the matter.
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 extracated 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 two 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 :- 22.9.2023
AKS
