Akshay Lal Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

Akshay Lal Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2022) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

None; the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding was rejected and no specific direction was issued on the bail prayer.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 22.11.2021 passed in complaint case No 889 of 2021 and the consequential proceedings/charge sheet ought to be quashed in exercise of powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

Court's answer

In exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C. the Court is not required to assess the correctness of the allegations or the reliability of the material collected during investigation; since the allegations disclosed a cognizable offence supported by investigation material on the basis whereof a charge sheet was laid, the prayer to quash the charge sheet and the consequential proceeding is rejected.

Ratio / Principle

No specific direction need be issued regarding consideration of the applicants' bail prayer; relying on the guidelines already laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI, it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court, without fettering its discretion or the statutory provisions governing grant of bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of summoning order refused (S.482 Cr.P.C.). Application under section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the summoning order dated 22.11.2021 passed by the Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC (Crime against Women), Court No. 15, Bhadohi-Gyanpur in complaint case No 889 of 2021 (Sapna Devi Vs. Akshay Lal Yadav and others), by which the applicants were summoned under sections 498-A, 323 PC and section 3/4 D.P. Act. Held: in exercise of its power under section 482 Cr.P.C. the Court is not required to assess the correctness of the allegations or the reliability of the material collected during investigation; the allegations in the FIR disclosed a cognizable offence, found support from the investigation material, and a charge sheet was laid on that basis — the prayer to quash the charge sheet and consequential proceedings was accordingly rejected. On the applicants' submission that they had not been arrested and coercive processes were apprehended, the Court, noting that the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation (SLP (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided 07.10.2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, declined to issue any specific direction, expecting the court concerned to take those guidelines into consideration. Application disposed of.

Court No. - 86

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1000 of 2022

Applicant :- Akshay Lal Yadav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

This application has been filed for quashing of the summoning order dated 22.11.2021 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/FTC (Crime against Women),Court No. 15, Bhadohi-Gyanpur in complaint case No 889 of 2021 (Sapna Devi Vs. Akshay Lal Yadav and others) by which summoning the applicants under sections 498-A, 323 PC and section 3/4 D.P. Act.

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 applicants submits that the applicants have so far not been arrested in the above case and the police is seeking to arrest the applicants and there may be coercive processes issued against the applicants by the court concerned therefore, some direction may be issued to the court concerned for consideration of the bail prayer of the applicants.

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 :- 13.4.2022

RPD

Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.04.13 17:37:16 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad