Back
2023 Supreme(All) 1341
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
PRITINKER DIWAKER, CJ., ASHWANI KUMAR MISHRA, AJAY BHANOT, JJ.
Chandrapal Singh - Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another - Opposite Parties
Application U/S 482 No. 28574 Of 2019
Decided On : 03-11-2023
For the Applicant : Prashant Shukla, Rajrshi Gupta, Sudhanshu Kumar.
For the Opposite Parties : G.A., Rohit Shukla, Shashi Kant Shukla.
Act Referred
Constitution Forty-second Amendment Act : S.4
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA : Art.129, Art.132, Art.134(a), Art.136, Art.14, Art.141, Art.142, Art.142(1), Art.144, Art.15(3), Art.19(1)(g), Art.194(3), Art.21, Art.215, Art.226, Art.226(3), Art.227, Art.32, Art.372
CRIMINAL LAW AMENDMENT ACT : S.7(2)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE : S.155(2), S.195, S.258, S.309, S.311, S.320, S.340, S.397, S.407, S.468, S.482, S.561(a)
DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT : S.3, S.4
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT : S.107, S.223
HIGH COURTS ACT : S.15
INCOME TAX ACT : S.254(2)(a), S.254(a)
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.420, S.498(a)
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code : S.12(3)
PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT : S.13(1)(e), S.13(2)
TERRORIST AND DISRUPTIVE ACTIVITIES PREVENTION ACT : S.19, S.5
JUDGMENT :
[Ajay Bhanot, J.]
1. The judgment is being structured in the following conceptual framework to facilitate the discussion:
| I | Facts, Applications and Submissions of learned counsels | ||||||||||
| II | Asian Resurfacing:
| ||||||||||
| III | Fixation of time limits by courts to conclude criminal/judicial proceedings : Whether Asian Resurfacing (supra) runs contrary to the law laid down in A.R. Antulay and P. Ramachandra Rao ? | ||||||||||
| IV | Interim Orders : Grant, Alteration & Vacation | ||||||||||
| V | High Court:
| ||||||||||
| VI | Supreme Court: A
| ||||||||||
| VII | Article 132 & Substantial questions of law as to interpretation of the Constitution of India | ||||||||||
| VIII | Orders on Applications & grant of certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court. |
2. An interim order was granted by this Court on 25.07.2019 in favour of the applicant in application under Section 482 Cr.P.C No. 28574 of 2019 (Chandrapal Singh Vs State of U.P. and another) staying the criminal trial. The informant did not file a counter affidavit nor did he enter appearance through counsels in the aforesaid proceedings before this Court. The State Government too did not file a counter affidavit in the said case.
3. The matter was listed on several occasions but could not be taken up for hearing due to paucity of time and large docket size of the Court. The first informant moved the learned trial court on the footing that the stay order granted by this Court stood vacated by operation of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and Another Vs Central Bureau of Investigation, 2018 (16) SCC 299. The trial court commenced the criminal trial proceedings in compliance of the directions in Asian Resurfacing (supra). Non bailable warrants were issued against the applicant by the trial court, leading to his arrest. He was granted bail subsequently by this Court.
4. According to the applicant’s counsel, the interim order in the applicant’s favour was automatically vacated and the applicant suffered imprisonment for no fault of his. The applicant now faces a vexatious prosecution.
5. The section 482 Cr.P.C. application as well as the bail application were later connected and heard together by a Single Judge Bench of which one of us (Ajay Bhanot, J.) was a member.
6. A number of counsels, and the Allahabad High Court Bar Association appeared before the Court and advanced various submissions. The intervention application of the Bar was allowed. The complications arising from the compliance of the directions in Asian Resurfacing (supra), were brought to the notice of the Court.
7. The Single Judge Bench framed the following questions for consideration:
“(i) Whether the Single Judge of this Court or the High Court can consider and interpret the judgment of the Supreme Court rendered in Asian Resurfacing (supra)?
(ii) Whether this issue is liable to be referred to a Full Bench, if yes, the relevant provisions and authorities of law?
(iii) Whether the High Court can interpret the Asian Resurfacing (supra) and pass orders in regard to its implementation in the wake of Asian Resurfacing-IV(sic.) rendered on 25.04.2022?
(iv) Whether the issue raises substantial questions relating to interpretation of Constitution of India?”
8. In view of the constitutional importance of the matter and the wide ranging consequences in the State of U.P. resulting from the directions in Asian Resur
