Dismissed

Ravi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2022A482/11703/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a trial summons arising from caste-related offenses, the High Court rejected the plea, finding sufficient evidence in the FIR and charge sheet. The Court declined to issue specific bail directions, referring to Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

Rejected prayer to quash summons and charge sheet; no specific directions issued regarding bail.

Ravi and Another Vs State of U.P… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11703 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ravi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 04.01.2022 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST) Amroha, in S.S.T. No. 69 of 2019 (State Vs. Haridas and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 278 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) 5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Adampur, District Amroha whereby the applicant has been summoned to face trial in the aforesaid case.

¶7

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 and thereafter, the applicants have been summoned to face trial under the aforesaid Sections.

¶8

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.

¶9

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.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off. Order Date :- 18.7.2022 S.Ali

¶13

Digitally signed by SHAUKAT ALI Date: 2022.07.19 10:17:54 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ravi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravi and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamlesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Imam Khan and Another Vs State of U.P and Another

Sundar Pal Thakur @ Sundar Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chhotelal Vs State of U.P.and Another

Nafish Ali (Minor) Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Kumar Rastogi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another