Nasir Saeed and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2787 of 2023 Appellant :- Nasir Saeed And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Brijesh Kumar Singh,Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶1Sri Anand Mani Tripathi, Advocate, has put in appearance on behalf of the opp. party No. 2 by filing his vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶2The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the S.C./S.T. Act has been moved on behalf of the appellants-Nasir Saeed, Asim Hasan and Mohd. Shahrukh alias Mohd. Aftab with a prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated

01.05.2023 passed by Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Lucknow in Sessions Case No. 1754 of 2023 as well as charge sheet No. 01 of 2023, dated 27.01.2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 72 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)

(Da) and 3(1)(Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Madeyganj, District Lucknow.

¶3Ms. Anamika Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Brijesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant, after some arguments submits that she confines her prayer to the extent that the court below be directed to decide the bail-application of the appellants in the light of the judgment passed by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others : (2021) 10 SCC 773, after they surrender before the Court below.

¶4Sri Anand Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. has no objection to the prayer made.

¶5The 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."

¶6Thus, without commenting anything on the merits of the case the present appeal moved on behalf of the appellants is finally disposed of in terms that the appellants 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 :- 13.12.2023 A.Nigam High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench