Single judge quashed entire crime proceedings as allegations supported by investigation material. Court declined arrest-related directions, citing Supreme Court bail guidelines. Application disposed without specific bail directives.
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. - 87
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6333 of 2022
Applicant :- Sanjay Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Bajpayee Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. 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 proceedings of case No. 211 of 2021 (State Vs. Premchandra and others) arising out of case crime No. 335 of 2020, under section 323, 325 IPC, P.S. Lal Ganj, District Mirzapur pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur.
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 28.07.2021) 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 :- 11.11.2022
RPD
Digitally signed by RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI Date: 2022.11.15 17:55:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash proceedings under section 482 Cr.P.C. where FIR discloses cognizable offence.
Whether direction should be issued regarding bail prayer for non-arrested applicant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherReferred¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, decided on 28.07.2021)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sanjay
State of U.P.
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
