Court No.28
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 521 of 2010
Doodh Nath Singh
S/o Bhukan Prasad Singh,
R/o 10, Chand Nagar, Rae Bareli,
Presently working as Principal, Baboo Jai Shanker Gaya
Prasad Mahavidyalaya, Sumer Pur,
Police Station Bihar,
District Unnao ...............Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. and others ...........Opp. Parties
Hon'ble Alok K. Singh, J.
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. who has put in appearance on
behalf of opposite parties nos.1, 2 and 3.
At this stage notice in respect of opposite party no. 4 is dispensed with.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge-
sheet dated 08.06.2009 arising out of Case Crime No.900 of 2008, under Section 306 I.P.C., Police
Station Keet Ganj, District Allahabad.
The charge-sheet has been filed on the basis of the accusation made in the F.I.R. and the
evidence collected during investigation including the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The other
averments are factual in nature that cannot be adjudicated in the present application. There does not
appear to be any sufficient cogent ground for quashing of the entire proceedings.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submits that the petitioner happens to be principal
of the school aged about 58 years. Learned counsel also submits that on account of attendance below
75% the principal was duty bound to decline permission from appearing the girl in the examination.
However being law abiding citizen he intends to participate in the proceedings after seeking bail.
Without entering into the merits of the case in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it
is directed that if the applicant appears before the court concerned and applies for bail within three
weeks from today, both the courts below shall dispose of the application expeditiously, keeping in
view that he is aged about 58 years and also held a responsible post of Principal of the School, in
accordance with the Full Bench decision of this Court Srimati Amrawati and another Vs. State of
U.P. 2004 CBC page 705 and Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Versus State of U.P. reported in 2009 (1)
JIC 677 & 2009 (2) Crimes 4 (SC). Thereafter, the trial court may permit the applicant to appear
through counsel and raise his objection, if any, against the initiation of trial proceedings against him at
the stage of framing of charges. This relief is being granted up to the stage of framing of charges only
provided the applicant after securing bail (1) furnishes an undertaking to the satisfaction of the trial
court that his counsel will remain present on his behalf and will represent him on each and every date,
(2) he will not raise any objection as to the actual presence of the person who is facing trial, (3) an
undertaking will also be given to the effect that he will be present before the court whenever called
upon to do so at any stage. These directions are being accorded in the light of the observations made
by Hon’ble Apex Court in the cases of M/s Bhaskar Industries Ltd. Vs. Bhiwani Denim and
Apparels Limited reported in 2001 Cri. Law Journal page 4250.
Till the aforesaid period of three weeks, bailable/non-bailable warrant, if any, shall be kept in
abeyance.
With these observations this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of.
04.02.2010
PAL/CMC No. 521 of 2010