Pawan Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12056 of 2023 Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijendra Mani Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J. Heard Shri Brijendra Mani Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant seeking quashing of the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 1814 of 2023, Pawan Kumar Dubey, in pursuance of Chargesheet No. 01 of 2023 dated 11.07.2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 133 of 2023 under Sections 323,504,506, I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da) and 3(1)(Dha), S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989, P.S. Dhammaur, District Sultanpur, pending before the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act, Sultanpur as well as summoning order dated 24.07.2023 passed in the said case. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the applicant prays that a direction may be given to the court below that if the applicant surrenders and applies for bail, his bail-application may be considered in accordance with law in the light of the judgement passed by Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil (supra) was pleased to observe as under:- "3. We are inclined to accept the guidelines and make them a part of the order of the Court for the benefit of the Courts below. The guidelines are as under: "Categories/Types of Offences A) Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less not falling in category B & D. B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years. C) Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail likeNDPS (S.37), PMLA (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5), Companies Act, 212(6), etc. D) Economic offences not covered by Special Acts. Requisite Conditions 1) Not arrested during investigation. 2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before Investigating Officer whenever called. (No need to forward such an accused along with the chargesheet (Siddharth v. State of UP, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 615) CATEGORY A After filing of chargesheet/complaint taking of cognizance a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including permitting appearance through Lawyer. b) If such an accused does not appear despite service of summons, then Bailable Warrant for physical appearance may be issued. c) NBW on failure to failure to appear despite issuance of Bailable Warrant. d) NBW may be cancelled or converted into a Bailable Warrant/Summons without insisting physical appearance of accused, if such an application is moved on behalf of the accused before execution of the NBW on an undertaking of the accused to appear physically on the next date/s of hearing. e) Bail applications of such accused on appearance may be decided w/o the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided. CATEGORY B/D On appearance of the accused in Court pursuant to process issued bail application to be decided on merits." CATEGORY C Same as Category B & D with the additional condition of compliance of the provisions of Bail under NDPS S. 37, 45 PMLA, 212(6) Companies Act 43 d(5) of UAPA, POSCO etc.

¶4Needless to say that the category A deals with both police cases and complaint cases.

¶5The trial Courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines while considering bail applications. The caveat which has been put by learned ASG is that where the accused have not cooperated in the investigation nor appeared before the Investigating Officers, nor answered summons when the Court feels that judicial custody of the accused is necessary for the completion of the trial, where further investigation including a possible recovery is needed, the aforesaid approach cannot give them benefit, something we agree with.

¶6We may also notice an aspect submitted by Mr. Luthra that while issuing notice to consider bail, the trial Court is not precluded from granting interim bail taking into consideration the conduct of the accused during the investigation which has not warranted arrest. On this aspect also we would give our imprimatur and naturally the bail application to be ultimately considered, would be guided by the statutory provisions." Without commenting anything on the merits of the case the present application moved on behalf of the applicant is finally disposed of in terms that the applicant may move an appropriate regular bail application before the trial court within 30 days from today and if such an application is moved within the period stipulated herein-before, the trial court shall be under an obligation to dispose of the same strictly, in accordance with the law as laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil (supra) after hearing the Public Prosecutor. (Shamim Ahmed, J.) Order Date :- 12.12.2023 A.Nigam High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench