Pradeep Singh Alias Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pradeep Singh Alias Baba Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of: applicant permitted to apply for bail before the court below within 30 days, with the bail prayer to be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law; additionally, the applicant is not to be arrested for 30 days or till he applies for bail, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 25.10.2016 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Special Trial No.219 of 2016 ought to be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

Going through the record and the submissions, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants; at this stage only a prima facie case falls to be assessed, in the light of the law laid down in the cited Supreme Court decisions.

Ratio / Principle

The application is disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the applicant appears and applies for bail within 30 days from the date of the order, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

Because the Apex Court has already laid down guidelines for grant of bail (Satender Kumar Antil), without fettering judicial discretion or statutory provisions, no specific additional directions were issued by this Court; the concerned court is expected to take those guidelines into consideration.ratio¶15
For 30 days from the date of the order, or until the applicant applies for bail (whichever is earlier), the applicant shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case.ratio¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Court No. 11, single-member coram (Hon'ble Rajeev Singh, J.), order dated 12.06.2025; neutral citation 2025:AHC-LKO:35403. Application U/S 482 No. 4997 of 2025 by Pradeep Singh alias Baba sought quashing of the summoning order dated 25.10.2016 passed by the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Special Trial No.219 of 2016 (State vs. Sandeep Singh and another), arising out of charge-sheet No.12 of 2016 dated 27.01.2016 under Sections 323 & 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. P.G.I., District Lucknow. Counsel did not press the quashing plea on merits, confining the request to leave to move a bail application with a direction for its expeditious disposal. Recording that it could not be said that no offence was made out (prima facie assessment against R.P. Kapur, Bhajan Lal, P.P. Sharma, Zandu Pharmaceutical and Parabatbhai Ahir), the Court disposed of the application, directing that if the applicant appears and applies for bail before the court below within 30 days his bail prayer shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law — drawing on the directions in Amrawati (described as a seven judges Bench of this Court), Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh, Hussain, the suo motu writ judgment dated 20.04.2021 approving the Draft Rules of Criminal Practice 2021 (Chapter V Rule 17: bail in non-bailable cases ordinarily within 3 to 7 days of first hearing) and the Satender Kumar Antil bail guidelines — and further directing that the applicant shall not be arrested for 30 days or till the bail application, whichever is earlier.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:35403

Court No. - 11

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4997 of 2025

Applicant :- Pradeep Singh Alias Baba Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Pushpendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant 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 25.10.2016 passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lucknow in Special Trial No.219 of 2016 (State vs. Sandeep Singh and another) arising out of charge-sheet No.12 of 2016 dated 27.01.2016, under Sections 323 & 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. P.G.I., District Lucknow.

After arguing the matter at some length, learned counsel for applicant 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 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 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 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 nonbailable 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 facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant, the application is disposed of with a direction to the court below that if the applicant appears and applies for bail before the court below within 30 days from today, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

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

Order Date :- 12.6.2025 Reena/-

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

Digitally signed by :- REENA KANNAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench