Disposed

Sachin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2023/2241/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of the appeal, finding the trial court did not inform the state of its right to be heard on the merits. It granted liberty to the appellant to move for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. within 30 days, mandating the trial court to dispose of it strictly according to Supreme Court direction.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to the appellant to move a regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. within 30 days, with a direction to the trial court to dispose of it strictly per Satender Kumar Antil.

Sachin Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:44695

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2241 of 2022

¶4

Appellant :- Sachin Kumar Singh Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Indu Prakash Singh,Salil Shekhar Singh,Subhash Singh

¶5

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari

¶6

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

Instant appeal has been filed under Section 14 (A) (1) of S.C./S.T. Act, 1989 against the impugned order dated 23.08.2022 passed by the Special Judge (S.C./S.T) Act, District Ambedkar Nagar in Complaint Case No. 39 of 2019 by which the appellant has been summoned under Section 376 IPC and Section 3 (2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act registered at Police Station Sammanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶9

The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that no offence against the appellant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. It is further submitted that earlier also the complainant had lodged the F.I.R. against the appellant in which twice final report was filed and threeafter the case was come to an end. After conclusion of earlier proceedings, the complainant has filed a complaint case with the same allegation in which the summoning order has been issued, which is subject matter of the present appeal.

¶10

Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on the judgment and order dated 31.05.2023 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1785 of 2023 where said criminal appeal was disposed of without dispensing notice to the private opposite party directing the appellant to appear before the learned trial court and move an application for regular bail within 30 days.

¶11

Per contra, the learned AGA has contended that from the allegations made in the FIR prima facie offence is made out against the appellant but he is not in a position to dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶12

The innocence of the appellant cannot be adjudged at the pre trial stage. Therefore, the appellant do not deserve any indulgence.

¶13

The High Court would not embark upon an inquiry as it is the function of the Trial Judge/Court. The interference at the threshold of quashing of the charge sheet/criminal proceedings in case in hand cannot be said to be exceptional as it discloses prima facie commission of an offence. In the result, the prayer made for quashing is refused. The appellant have ample opportunity to raise all the objections at the appropriate stage.

¶14

At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants has prayed that liberty be given to the applicants to file bail application before the trial court which may be decided in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in order dated 7.10.2021 passed in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Cri) No.5191 of 2021 Satender Kumar Antil versus Central Bureau of Investigation and another.

¶15

Learned AGA has no objection to the prayer made by learned counsel for the appellant.

¶16

Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case and on the request of learned counsel for the appellant, the present appeal moved on behalf of the appellant is finally disposed of in terms that the appellant is at liberty to move an appropriate regular bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. before the trial court within 30 days from today and if such an application is moved within the period stipulated herein-before, the trial court shall be under an obligation to dispose of the same strictly, in accordance with the law as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) after hearing the Public Prosecutor.

¶17

Order Date :- 11.7.2023

¶18

Ashish

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sachin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

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

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Anr.

Vinod Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Naseem @ Kasim Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Rakam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Govind and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and 2 Others