Allahabad High Court
Nazim @ Mohammad Nazim vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko ... on 16 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:38118
Court No. - 13
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1590 of 2024
Appellant :- Nazim @ Mohammad Nazim
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko And Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Himanshu Suryavanshi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned AGA for the State as well as perused the record.
2. The present appeal has been filed for the following main relief:-
"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the Appeal and set aside the judgment and order dated 31-10-2022 passed by the Learned Court of Special Judge SC / ST Act, Pratapgarh, in Session Trial No. 323 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 115 of 2021, Under Sections 376-D, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and Section 3(1)(r),3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station - Udaypur, District - Pratapgarh and may kindly quash the Charge Sheet No. A51A of 2022 dated 02-10-2022 filed by the investigating officer against the appellant and other co-accused persons."
3. Considering the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, including the statement of victim recorded before the trial court in S.T. No.146 of 2023 (State Vs. Riyaz) it cannot be said that no offence is made out against appellant and taking note of the same above law related to causing interference in criminal proceedings laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the 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, another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843, on being confronted, after arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the appellant submits that he does not want to press this appeal on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that appellant may be permitted to move bail application, before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance to law.
4. Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of aforesaid prayer.
5. A seven judges Bench of this Court in the case of "Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) and in Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 have given various directions to criminal Courts for expeditious disposal of Bail applications. The ratio of above mentioned decisions is quite clear that, in the backdrop of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the personal liberty of a person is at stake, the bail application should be decided, expeditiously.
6. In the recent judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SUO MOTO WRIT (CRL) No. (S) 1 of 2017 In RE: To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. vide its judgment and order dated 20.04.2021 has observed the common deficiencies which occurred in the proceedings of the criminal cases and approved "The Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2021" which is the part of the judgment in Chapter V Rule 17 of aforesaid Rules that the application for bail in non-bailable cases must ordinarily be disposed off within a period of 3 to 7 days from the date of first hearing. If the application is not disposed off within such period, the Presiding Officer shall furnish reasons thereof in the order itself.
7. Further, as the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.5191 of 2021 has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific directions need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court.
8. In backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant, the appeal is disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the appellant apply for bail before the Court below within 30 days from today, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 16.5.2024
(Manoj K.)
