Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC16 Jul 2022A482/9918/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings and charge sheet under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Court held FIR disclosed cognizable offence. Rejection of quash prayer. Court was not required to issue specific bail directions as Supreme Court guidelines suffice.

What did the court decide?

Prayer to quash proceedings and charge sheet rejected; no specific directions on bail.

Sundar Pal Thakur @ Sundar Pal Singh… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 83 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9918 of 2022 Applicant :- Sundar Pal Thakur @ Sundar Pal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikram Singh Shrivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vikram Singh Shrivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶4

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.319 of 2021 (State Vs. Sundar Pal Singh Bundela), arising out of Case Crime No. 275 of 2021, under Sections 504, 506, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) Da, Dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Talbehat, District Lalitpur, pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lalitpur as well as to quash the impugned order dated 01.11.2021 and to quash the charge-sheet No. 290 of 2021, dated 18.09.2021.

¶5

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.

¶6

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.

¶7

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.

¶8

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.

¶9

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed off.

¶10

Order Date :- 16.7.2022/Abhishek Singh

¶11

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH Date: 2022.07.18 11:02:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sundar Pal Thakur @ Sundar Pal Singh 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

Prosenjit Roy Vs State of U.P and Another

Subes Kumar Shahi @ Sunni and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

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

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