G. S. Raghav vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 3 August, 2026

    0
    2
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Supreme Court – Daily Orders

    G. S. Raghav vs State Of Uttar Pradesh on 3 August, 2026

    Author: Sanjay Karol

    Bench: Sanjay Karol

                                             IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                            CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
    
                                       CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s).      OF 2026
                              (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO(s).4719/2026)
    
    
         G. S. RAGHAV                                                                    APPELLANT(S)
    
                                                             VERSUS
    
         STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.                                                   RESPONDENT(S)
    
                                                          O R D E R
    

    1. Leave granted.

    2. The appellant challenges the judgment/order dated

    SPONSORED

    16.01.2026 in Application U/s 528 BNSS No.27010/2025

    passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.

    3. In connection with Crime Case No.1889 of 2018

    registered under Sections 420, 406, 415, 418, 467, 468,

    471, 120-B and 34 of the IPC registered at Police Station

    Kavi Nagar, District Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh it is not

    in dispute that the charge sheet stands filed, in which

    respondent No.2 and his family members namely father-

    Avdhesh Kumar Goyal and mother-Seema Goyal stand named as

    accused persons. We notice that the Trial Court had

    bifurcated the trial into two (02) cases, being Case

    No.637 of 2022 and Case No.638 of 2022.

    4. We notice that in terms of the impugned order, the
    Signature Not Verified
    High Court has granted bail to respondent No.2 – Avdhesh
    Digitally signed by
    NAVEEN D
    Date: 2026.08.06
    19:24:03 IST
    Reason: Goyal. It is also brought to our notice that bail bonds

    furnished by Ms. Seema Goyal have not yet been accepted

    1
    by the Trial Court. So far, the prosecution has intended

    not to arrest her.

    5. In that view of the matter, we direct the Trial Court

    to accept the bail bonds of Ms. Seema Goyal on the

    appropriate terms and conditions as may be fixed by it.

    However, in the attending facts, one of the conditions

    shall necessarily be that if she possesses a passport,

    the same shall be deposited before the Competent

    Authority/Court until the conclusion of the trial or

    unless directed otherwise.

    6. On 08.05.2026, this Court passed the following order:

    “ 1. Let respondent no.1-State file
    a comprehensive affidavit dealing
    with not only the subject-matter of
    the present lis but also all other
    cases, their status and the stage of
    investigation/trial, which are
    pending against respondent no.2 but
    also his family members and all the
    accused in relation to the very same
    crime. Let needful be done within
    six weeks.

    2. We direct respondent no.2 and his
    family members who otherwise have
    undertaken before us, to positively
    appear on all dates, as may be fixed
    by the Trial Court and not to seek
    any unnecessary adjournment. In
    fact, they shall fully cooperate

    2
    with the expeditious disposal of the
    trial.

    3. We are informed that there are
    other accused, who are also not
    appearing before the Trial Court. If
    that were so, it shall be open for
    the Trial Court to take steps for
    cancellation of their bail, if any,
    and/or take steps for enforcing
    their presence, in accordance with
    law.

    4. We further direct, should the
    Trial Court deem it appropriate, it
    shall be open for them to segregate
    the trial.

    5. Let the State also file an
    affidavit indicating the
    consequential steps taken by the
    Trial Court in terms of this order.

    6. List on 03.08.2026. ”

    7. Vide the order extracted supra, this Court directed

    both respondent No.2 herein and his family members to

    positively appear on all dates as may be fixed by the

    Trial Court and not seek any unnecessary adjournments. In

    fact, we had directed that they shall fully cooperate

    with the expeditious disposal of the trial.

    8. We deem it fit in the interest of justice to dispose

    of the present appeal by making our interim order dated

    3
    08.05.2026 absolute, further clarifying that if the

    accused do not cooperate with the expeditious disposal of

    the trial and/or comply with our order, it shall be open

    for the trial court to cancel the bail. Ordered

    accordingly.

    9. The parties undertake to fully cooperate. We direct

    the prosecution to produce the witnesses on such dates as

    may be fixed by the Trial Court.

    10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed

    of.

    ………………J.
    (SANJAY KAROL)

    ………………J.
    (AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH)

    NEW DELHI
    03-08-2026

    4
    ITEM NO.29 COURT NO.8 SECTION II

    S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

    Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4719/2026

    [Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 16-01-2026
    in A528BNSS No.27010/2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at
    Allahabad]

    G. S. RAGHAV PETITIONER(S)

    VERSUS

    STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S)

    FOR ADMISSION
    IA No. 81400/2026 – EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
    IA No. 84697/2026 – PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
    DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES

    Date : 03-08-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.

    CORAM :

    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KAROL
    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH

    For Petitioner(s) :

    Ms. Riddhi Sancheti, AOR
    Mr. Anurag Anand, Adv.
    Ms. Aparna Tripathi, Adv.
    Mr. Nishant Gaurav, Adv.

    For Respondent(s) :

    Mr. Vikas Bansal, Adv.
    Dr. Vijendra Singh, AOR
    Mr. Aniket Tiwari, Adv.

    Ms. Madhavi Divan, Sr. Adv.
    Mr. Vishal Gosain, Sr. Adv.
    Ms. Rudrani Tyagi, Adv.
    Ms. Maulshree Pathak, AOR

    Mr. Prashant, AOR

    5
    Upon hearing the counsel the Court made the following
    O R D E R

    1. Leave granted.

    2. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order,

    which is placed on the file.

    3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed

    of.

           (D. NAVEEN)                    (NIKITA SINGH)
         COURT MASTER (SH)              COURT MASTER (NSH)
    
    
    
    
                                6
    



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here