Ms. Prabha Naithani vs Unknown
2023 Latest Caselaw 1009 UK

                Office Notes,
             reports, orders or
SL.           proceedings or
      Date                                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No             directions and
             Registrar's order
              with Signatures
                                  C482 No. 721 of 2023
                                  Hon'bleSharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Ms. Prabha Naithani, learned counsel for the applicant.

Mr. Pratiroop Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present applicant is facing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 103 of 21, State Vs. Hirendra Solanki, whereby he has been summoned by the impugned order dated 30.11.2021, to be tried for the offences under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C and Section 66(d) of I.T. Act, in which, the summoning order dated 30.11.2021 has been issued.

It is alleged by the learned Government Advocate that the present applicant was arrested from Haryana.

Be that as it may, his arrest from Haryana will not have any effect, particularly, when the applicant in C482 Application has confined, that his bail application may be considered in the light of the judgment of "Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another", as reported in 2022 (10) SCC Page 51, as all the offences carry a sentence of less than 7 years, they would be falling under 'A' category of offences and are required to be dealt with in accordance with para 3(e) of the said judgment.

In that eventuality, while disposing of C482 Application on the aforesaid admitted relief claimed by the applicant, it will be open for the applicant to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of two weeks from today and seek to his appropriate remedy as available for 'A' category of offences, as prescribed in para 3(e) of the said judgment.

For the period, till the applicant surrenders and his bail application is considered, the N.B.W. already issued against the present applicant and the consequential proceeding under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. would not be given effect to.

The interim protection granted by this Court may not be construed that this Court has made any observations on merit of the matter, which has to be independently decided.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 17.04.2023 Akash