High Court rejected petition to quash charge-sheet and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as FIR and material disclosed offence. Court declined to issue specific bail directions, citing Apex Court guidelines.
Charge-sheet and proceedings not quashed. No specific direction issued regarding bail considerations.
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. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10591 of 2022 Applicant :- Chunnu @ Abu Kasim Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Kant Srivastava,Pradeep Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
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 Charge-sheet dated 25.06.2020, cognizance order dated 29.10.2020 as well as entire proceedings of S.T. No. 177 of 2020 (State Vs. Chunnu @ Abu Kasim) arising out of Case Crime No. 74 of 2020, under sections 427, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh) & 3(2)(va) SC/ST Act, at Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh, pending before Additional Sessions Judge/ SC/ST Court, Azamgarh.
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 applicants 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 :- 27.5.2022/Abhishek Singh
Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.05.28 15:34:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should quash the charge-sheet and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. given prima facie evidence of a cognizable offence.
Whether directions should be issued to the lower court to consider the applicant's bail prayer in light of Apex Court guidelines.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar AntilReferred¶8
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 07.10.2021)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Chunnu @ Abu Kasim
State Of U.P
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
