Allowed

Anand Swarup Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC6 Jan 2023CRLR/5027/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a criminal revision challenging a charge framing order under IPC Section 307. Despite counsel arguments that the injury report did not support such an offence and the accused lacked a bond, the Court directed the revisionist to execute fresh bail bonds within ten days, admitting him for the new charge while relying on existing sureties and instructing the trial court to

What did the court decide?

Revisionist directed to furnish fresh bail bonds within ten days; to be admitted on bail for Section 307 IPC; existing sureties to remain in force; trial to proceed without impugned order observations

Anand Swarup Shukla Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 87

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 5027 of 2022

¶3

Revisionist :- Anand Swarup Shukla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Surendra Kumar Chaubey,Maan Singh,Sr. Advocate Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri G.S. Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri S.K. Chaubey, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the order dated 22nd November, 2022 passed by learned Special Judge (M.P./M.L.A.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Ballia in Sessions Trial No. 343 of 2015 (State Vs. Anand Swarup Shukla & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 31 of 2013, under Sections 147, 323/34, 324/34, 504, 506 I.P.C, Police Station Kotwali, District Ballia.

¶7

The complainant filed an application for altering the charge against the revisionist for offence under Section 307 I.P.C. The FIR was registered only for offence under Sections 147, 323/34, 324/34, 504, 506 IPC and even the police after investigating the offence filed charge-sheet in the said offences and the charge was also framed in the said offences.

¶8

At the time of framing of the charge, the complainant was heard. After PW-1 was examined, the application came to be filed under Section 216 Cr.P.C. for altering the charge and the learned trial Court has altered the charge and added charge under Section 307 read with I.P.C.

¶9

Sri G.S. Chaurvedi, learned Senior Counsel submits that injury report, which has been placed on record with this revision by no stretch of imagination would not attract the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. However, the trial Court on the basis of mere evidence of PW-1, without considering the injury report has invoked the charge under Section 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. against the accused-revisionist. Sri Chaturvedi, learned Senior Counsel also submits that since the accused-revisionist was not on bail for the said offence, as it was neither in the FIR nor in the charge-sheet, the proceedings under Sections 82, 83 have been initiated against him. He

¶10

submits that the accused-revisionist is ready to face the trial and this Court may direct for submission of fresh bonds.

¶11

Sri J.P. Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate has no objection to the said prayer.

¶12

In view thereof, this revision is disposed of with direction to the revisionist to appear before the trial Court and furnish fresh bail bonds within a period of ten days from today. On furnishing fresh bail bonds, the revisionist shall be admitted on bail for offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 IP.C. as well. No fresh sureties are required to be submitted and the sureties already furnished hold good for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 149 I.P.C. as well. The trial Court will decide the case without taking into consideration any observation made in the impugned order.

¶13

[Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.]

¶14

Order Date :- 6.1.2023 Shafique

¶15

Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anand Swarup Shukla v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Swarup Shukla 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munshilal Vs State of U.P.

Suman Lata Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramji Singh Vs Central Beureau of Investigation

Kehar Singh and Others Vs State

Mokhtar Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.