Mohd. Sajid And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 546 UK

     HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

      Criminal Misc. Application No. 348 of 2017

Mohd. Sajid and others                             ........... Petitioners

                                   Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and another                  ........ Respondents



Present : Mr. Abhishek Verma, Advocate for the petitioners.
          Mr.    Pratiroop   Pande,   Deputy   Advocate     General for  the
          State/respondent no.1.
          Mr. Raj Kumar Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Anchit Khocher,
          Advocate for respondent no2.



                              JUDGMENT

Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

Challenge in this petition is made to

summoning order dated 28.02.2017 as well as the

entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 854 of 2017,

State vs. Mohammad Sajid and others, under

Sections 147, 148, 323, 354, 325, 504, 506, 511 & 34

IPC, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar

(for short, "the case").

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. In this matter, counter affidavit has also

been filed.

4. At the time of hearing, today, learned

counsel for the petitioners would restrict his

argument to the fact that a directions may be given to

the court below to decide the bail application of the

petitioners, in view of the judgment in the case

Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of

Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

5. Since, on merits, no arguments have been

made, therefore, this Court refrains to make any

observations with regard to the merits of the case.

6. In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra),

the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines

for disposal of the bail application. For that purpose,

the offences have been categorized 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 petitioners approach the trial court for bail,

the trial court shall definitely follow the directions

given in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra). No

separate directions of this Court are required for that

purpose.

7. In view of foregoing observations, the

petition is disposed of.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 05.03.2022 Nahid