Allowed

Rahul Bind v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2023A482/43999/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by Rahul Bind to quash prosecution under various IPC and SC/ST Act sections, the court refused the quashing prayer as disputes are factual. However, it directed the trial court to hear the subsequent bail application expeditiously in accordance with Supreme Court guidelines.

What did the court decide?

The prayer for quashing proceedings and NBW was refused; instead, directions were issued to the trial court to dispose of the bail application expeditiously.

Rahul Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43999 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Bind Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the Complaint Case No. 24 of 2020 (Renumbered as S.S.T. No. 496 of 2021), under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) da and 3(1) dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kotwali Dehat, District- Mirzapur as well as non-bailable warrant dated 25.08.2022 with a further prayer to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with malafide intentions for the purposes of harassment.

¶8

From the perusal of material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal,

¶9

1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 . The disputed defence of the accused cannot be considered at this stage. Moreover, the applicant has got a right of discharge and they are free to take all the submissions in the said discharge application before the trial court.

¶10

The prayer for quashing the proceedings of case as well as non bailable warrant is refused.

¶11

At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that directions may be given to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicant in view of the judgment in the case Satendra Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2021 SCC Online SC 922.

¶12

In the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court laid down the guidelines for deciding of the bail application. For that purpose, the cases have been divided under four categories. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that the trial courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines, while considering the bail application. This Court has no doubt, that as and when, the applicant approachs the trial court for bail, same shall be heard and disposed of expeditiously by the court below in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil (supra).

¶13

As such application has no force and is accordingly disposed of.

¶14

Order Date :- 16.2.2023 Krishna*

¶15

Digitally signed by :- KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Bind v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Bind 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

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P and Another

Sandeep Kumar Mishra and 6 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Suhail Ahmad Sardar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satya Prakash Chaubey @ Chhote Chaubey Vs State of U.P and Another

Prabal Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anju Aggarwal Vs state of up through secretary home and 2 others