Disposed

Gopal Alias Nand Gopal Bairagi and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 May 2023CRLA/5575/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court refused the prayer to quash the charge-sheet, cognizance, and summoning orders in a criminal appeal under the SC/ST Act. It held disputed facts were not for determination. The appeal was disposed of with a direction for the trial court to decide bail applications expeditiously if accused surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

The appeal was disposed of with a direction to the trial court to decide bail applications expeditiously if appellants appear and surrender within 30 days.

Gopal Alias Nand Gopal Bairagi and 5… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:117407

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5575 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Gopal Alias Nand Gopal Bairagi And 5 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rakesh Pathak Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Rakesh, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The instant appeal under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellants, G opal @ Nand Gopal, Khokhan @ Khokan Vishwas, Virsonith @ Vishwanath Vishwas, Nakul Vishwas, Amran @ Abhran Sarkar and Spa Sarkar with the prayer to allow this criminal appeal and quash/set-aside the cognizance/summoning order dated 14.10.2022 and order issuing non bailable warrant dated 24.2.2023, charge sheet dated 29.5.2022 No. 177 of 2022 in Sessions Trial No. 1448 of 2022 (State vs. Gopal @ Nand Gopal and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0171 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2)5A, 3(1) Dha of SC/ST Act, police station Madhotanda, district Pilibhit pending in the court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Pillibhit.

¶8

Learned counsel for the appellants has made many factual submissions to demonstrate that the FIR was lodged on false and concocted facts just to pressurize and harass the appellants and the Investigating Officer without going deep into the matter in a cursory manner has submitted the charge sheet, and the court below has taken cognizance without considering the matter in right perspective and, therefore, the charge sheet, the order of the Magistrate, whereby the cognizance has been taken and process is issued are bad in law and the same be quashed.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. while controverting the arguments of the learned counsel for appellants submits that, the arguments of the learned counsel for appellants is, with regard to the factual aspects of the case which cannot be appreciated at this stage, as only a prima facie case is required to be seen at the stage of taking of cognizance and issuance of process.

¶10

Having regard to the facts and circumstances and keeping in view the order intended to be passed, the service of notice on

¶11

opposite party no.2 is hereby dispensed with.

¶12

From the perusal of the 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 appellants. All the submissions made at the bar, relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be appreciated by this Court as at this stage only a primafacie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in the cases of R.P. Kapur Vs. State of Punjab, A.I.R. 1960 S.C. 866, State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal , 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar Vs. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192, Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. Vs. Mohd. Saraful Haq, another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283, Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843 and lastly State of Gujrat Vs Afroz Mohammed Hasanfatta reported in MANU/SC/0139/2019 .

¶13

Therefore, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing the Charge-sheet, cognizance/summoning order as well as all proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby refused.

¶14

Hon'ble Apex Court in 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, M ANU/SC/0292/2021 have given various directions to criminal Courts for expeditious disposal of Bail applications. The ratio of above mentioned decisions is quite clear that, in the backdrop of Article 21 of the Constitution of India as the personal liberty of a person is at stake, the bail applications should be decided, expeditiously.

¶15

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773 has issued various guidelines and provided a scheme with regard to the cases where the Charge Sheet has been filed without arrest of the accused person(s) during investigation and accused person(s) have Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before the Investigating Officer whenever called. Apex Court has also provided special procedure with regard to such cases where the charge sheet has been submitted under offences punishable with up to seven years of imprisonment. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.K. Antil (supra) has been reiterated in Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director : 2021 SCC OnLine SC 94.

¶16

In the backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case and having

¶17

regard to the request of learned counsel for the appellants, the appeal is disposed of with direction to the trial Court that if the appellants appear and surrender before the Court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously by the Court below strictly in accordance with the law referred to herein above.

¶18

If the opposite party no.2 feels aggrieved by this order, she/he may approach this Court by moving an appropriate application.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.5.2023 Sumaira

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SUMAIRA AQUIL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gopal Alias Nand Gopal Bairagi and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Alias Nand Gopal Bairagi and 5 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Alias Pawan Kumar Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajdeep @ Shippu Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Ravinder Kumar Sharma Vs Union Of India and 2 Others

Kallu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amarjeet Kaur and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another