Court No. - 45
Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2449 of 2019 Revisionist :- Nisar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Mohammad Waseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the revisionists and learned A.G.A.
This revision has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 08.03.2019 passed by the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly, in Session Trial No. 752 of 2016 (State Versus Ishtiyak), arising out of Case Crime No. 120 of 2015, under section 307 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Cantt, District Bareilly.
After advancing argument at length, learned counsel for the revisionists would submit that revisionists would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the court below to consider the bail application of the applicants in terms of the decisions rendered in Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC).
Learned A.G.A. would submit that the directions issued by this Court and the Hon'ble Supreme Court is binding upon the court below. A Division Bench of this Court in Brahm Singh & others vs. State of U.P. & others, 2016 (7) ADJ 151, has already issued direction to all the Sessions Judges of the State of Uttar pradesh, which is being followed. It is, therefore, urged that no fresh direction is required to be given. This fact is not being disputed by the learned counsel for the revisionists.
In regard thereto, revision is disposed of as withdrawn with liberty to the revisionists to file an appropriate application for bail before the court below within four weeks from date in terms of the decisions rendered in Amrawati (supra) as well as Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (supra).
In the event, such an application is filed, it is expected that the court below shall decide/dispose of the application in terms of Amrawati (supra), Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh (supra) and Brahm Singh (supra), strictly in accordance with law.
It is clarified that the Court has not considered the contention of the learned counsel for the revisionists on merit.
Order Date :- 24.6.2019 K.K. Maurya