Disposed

Intzar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 May 2023CRLA/2054/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal appeal filed under Section 14-A(1) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 without adjudicating on the merits. The Court observed that the appellants intended to surrender for regular bail but feared imprisonment during the process while the matter was pending. The Court directed the trial court to dispose of the bail application within a timeframe if the appellants file it.

What did the court decide?

The High Court directed the trial court to dispose of the appellants' bail application expeditiously under Sections 437/439 Cr.P.C. if they surrender within 30 days of the order.

Intzar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:105166

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2054 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Intzar And 2 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Brijendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

As per the communication sent by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur the O.P. No.2 has been sufficiently served, however, no one is present on her behalf.

¶7

Heard Brijendra Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The instant appeal under Section 14-A(1) SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellants with the prayer to allow the Criminal Appeal and set-aside the charge sheet dated 5.7.2020 and cognizance order dated 23.9.2020 passed by the Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act in Sessions Case No. 975 of 2020 (State vs. Intzar and others), in Case Crime No. 248 of 2020, under Sections 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(da) of the SC/ST Act, 1989 Police Station Nigohi, District Shahjahanpur.

¶9

Learned counsel for the appellants submits that though various prayers have been mentioned in the prayer clause of the appeal but they are confining their prayer to the tune that the appellants are intending to appear/surrender before the trial court for the purpose of obtaining regular bail, but are having apprehension that the moment they will appear before the trial court for the purpose of obtaining regular bail, disposal of their bail application may take time and in the meantime they may be confined in the prison, which would not only jeopardize his personal liberty but also bring a bad name to their reputation. Thus appropriate directions be given to the trial court for expeditious disposal of their bail application in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 941.

¶10

No objection in this regard has been made by learned A.G.A.

¶11

Keeping in view the fact that learned counsel for the appellants has confined his prayer only for issuance of appropriate directions to the trial court for expeditious disposal of bail application, which

¶12

the appellants are intending to move before the trial court, the instant appeal is disposed of with direction to the trial court that if the appellants appear/surrender before the trial court within 30 days from today and move an appropriate application for bail under Section 437/439 Cr.P.C., the trial court shall dispose of the same expeditiously in the light of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Sunil Bharti Mittal v. Central Bureau of Investigation , AIR 1976 SUPREME COURT 1947, Smt. Nagawwa v/s Veeranna Shivalingappa Konjalgi & others, AIR 2012 SUPREME COURT 1747, Bhushan Kumar and Anr v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Anr, AIR 1998 S. C . 128 , M/s. Pepsi Foods Ltd. and another v. Special Judicial Magistrate and others], Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017, In Re: To issue certain Guidelines Regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in Criminal Trials v. State of Andhra Pradesh and others, MANU/SC/0292/2021 , Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others (Supra) and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director (Supra), after providing an opportunity of being heard to the parties, strictly in accordance with law.

¶13

Order Date :- 15.5.2023 Akbar

¶14

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AKBAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Intzar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Intzar and 2 Others 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

Santram Maurya and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ajay Maurya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dr. Shiv Shankar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Paswan Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Smt. Seema Vs State of Uttar Pradesh and 6 Others