Jakir Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Jakir Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of (not pressed on merit) with directions: applicants permitted to appear/surrender before the court below within 30 days and apply for bail; bail prayer to be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law; applicants not to be arrested for 30 days or till they apply for bail, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 16.06.2023 passed on the protest application of the informant in Case Crime No. 216 of 2019 (Sections 323, 324, 452, 506 IPC, P.S. Rudauli, District Ayodhya) should be quashed. +2 more

Ratio / Principle

Having considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record, the Court found it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; accordingly the quashing prayer was not entertained on merits (the applicants themselves did not press the application on merit).

Key takeaways

The application was disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the applicants appear before the court below within 30 days from the date of the order and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.ratio¶25
For a period of 30 days from the date of the order or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, the applicants shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case.ratio¶26

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Lucknow (Rajeev Singh, J.; decision October 27, 2025) disposed of Application U/S 482 No. 11346 of 2024 by Jakir Ali and 3 Others v. State of U.P. The applicants had sought quashing of the summoning order dated 16.06.2023 passed on the protest application of the informant arising out of Case Crime No. 216 of 2019, under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Rudauli, District Ayodhya. Counsel did not press the application on merit, confining the prayer to surrender-and-bail directions. The Court observed that it cannot be said no offence is made out against the applicants (testing only the prima facie position in light of R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma, Zandu Pharmaceutical and Parabatbhai Ahir), and disposed of the matter directing that if the applicants appear before the court below within 30 days and apply for bail, their bail prayer shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law, invoking the Article 21-based expeditious-bail directions in Amrawati, Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh, Hussain, the Suo Motu Writ of 20.04.2021 (Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2021, Ch. V Rule 17: bail in non-bailable offences ordinarily within 3-7 days) and the Satender Kumar Antil guidelines. For 30 days, or till they apply for bail (whichever earlier), the applicants were protected from arrest.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11346 of 2024

Jakir Ali And 3 Others

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Neera Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 14

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

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

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.06.2023 on protest application of the informant arising out of Case Crime No. 216 of 2019, under Sections 323, 324, 452, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Rudauli, District Ayodhya.

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for the applicants submits that he does not want to press this application on merit and he confines his prayer only to the extent that applicants may be permitted to surrender and move bail application before the court concerned and suitable directions may be issued that the same may be heard and decided expeditiously, in accordance with law.

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in grant of the aforesaid prayer.

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against applicants.

At this stage, only prima facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Hon'ble 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

A482 No. 11346 of 2024

2

Lal, 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 & Another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.) 283 and Parabatbhai Ahir & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat AIR 2017 SC 4843 .

A seven judges Bench of this Court in the cases of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) and in Hussain and Ors. Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors. reported in MANU/SC/0274/2017 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 application should be decided, expeditiously.

In the recent judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SUO MOTU WRIT (CRL) No. (S) 1 of 2017 In RE: To issue certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. vide its judgment and order dated 20.04.2021 has observed the common deficiencies which occurred in the proceedings of the criminal cases and approved "The Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2021" which is the part of the judgment in Chapter V Rule 17 of aforesaid Rules that the application for bail in non-bailable cases must ordinarily be disposed off within a period of 3 to 7 days from the date of first hearing. If the application is not disposed off within such period, the Presiding Officer shall furnish reasons thereof in the order itself.

Further, as the Apex Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021) has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and the statutory provisions governing consideration in grant of bail, no specific directions need be issued by this Court as it is expected that the court concerned will take into consideration the necessary guidelines already issued by the Apex Court.

In backdrop of aforesaid decisions and keeping in view the entirety of

A482 No. 11346 of 2024

3

facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the applicants, the application is disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the applicants appear before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants apply for bail, whichever is earlier, the applicants shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case.

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

October 27, 2025 VKS

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench