Allowed condonation of delay in filing criminal appeal against summoning order. Disposed of appeal with liberty to apply for bail within three weeks.
Delay condoned; quashing of proceedings refused; bail application allowed within three weeks.
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. - 89 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 389 of 2022 Appellant :- Mohammad Muslim And 3 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Surya Pratap Singh Parmar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
(Order on Delay Condonation Application)
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for respondent no. 2.
On due consideration to the argument advanced as well as perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the delay condonation application, the delay condonation application is allowed and the delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned.
(Order on appeal)
Heard learned counsel for appellants-applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for State.
The present criminal appeal has been filed for setting aside the summoning order dated 14.09.2021 passed in S. T. No. 302/2021 "State Vs. Mohammad Muslim and others" arising out of case crime No. 27/2021, under Sections 323/504/506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Durgaganj,, District Bhadohi as well as entire proceedings of S. T. No. 302/2021 "State Vs. Mohammad Muslim and others" arising out of case crime No. 27/2021, under Sections 323/504/506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S. Durgaganj,, District Bhadohi.
Learned counsel for appellants-applicants, after arguing for some time, submits that present appeal may be dismissed as not pressed with liberty to file a bail application which may be decided in view of law laid down by Supreme Court in "Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Cri)No.5191 of 2021" to which learned A.G.A. has no objection.
In view of the above, prayer for quashing the impugned proceeding is refused. So far as other prayer is concerned, it is provided that in case the appellants-applicants namely Mohammad Muslim, Randhir Singh, Akash Pratap Singh and Vishwas Pratap Singh, appear before the trial court within three weeks' from today and apply for bail, the same shall be decided
expeditiously, in view of the law laid down by Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil's case (supra).
In view of the above observation, the appeal is disposed of.
Order Date :- 29.7.2022 RC
Digitally signed by RAM CHANDER YADAV Date: 2022.08.01 18:37:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether delay in filing criminal appeal under Section 5 of Cr.P.C. should be condoned?
Whether criminal appeal against summoning order should be allowed or dismissed without pressing?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherApplied¶11
Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another, Special Leave to Appeal (Cri)No.5191 of 2021
Mohammad Muslim and 3 Others
State of U.P.
Another
Karunesh Singh Pawar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
