Held that the charge sheet disclosing a cognizable offence is not held for quash. Bail prayer to be dealt with by trial court as Apex Court guidelines suffice.
Prayer to quash charge sheet rejected; specific bail directions refused; application disposed off.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11063 of 2021
Applicant :- Arun Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Upendra Upadhyay
Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application has been filed for quashing of the entire further proceedings pending in the court of C.J.M. Etah vide Case No. 1000 of 2021 (State Vs. Arun), under section 323, 376, 506 IPC in Case rime no. 705 of 2020, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Etah.
On perusal of the record, the Court finds that the allegations made in the first information report disclose commission of a cognizable offence and those allegations have found support from the material collected during the course of investigation on the basis whereof the police has laid a charge sheet against the applicant.
At this Court, in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C., is not required to assess the correctness of the allegation and the reliability of the material collected during the course of investigation, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicant and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicant by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicant.
As the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021) 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 direction 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.
With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.
Order Date :- 3.12.2021
RPD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the charge sheet under sections 323, 376, 506 IPC should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Whether specific directions are needed regarding the applicant's bail prayer pending investigation
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherFollowed¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Arun Kumar
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
