Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Om Prakash-VII, J.
Om Prakash Gupta - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. And Another - Respondent
Application U/S 482 No. - 36344 of 2015
Decided On : 18-12-2015
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Non-Bailable Warrant - The court refused to quash the non-bailable warrant and further proceedings of the complaint case, but allowed the applicant to surrender and apply for bail within fifteen days, with the effect and operation of the warrant remaining in abeyance for that period.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the non-bailable warrant and stay the further proceedings of the complaint case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was no case made out to interfere with the impugned order, and refused the prayer made in the application. However, it allowed the applicant to surrender and apply for bail within fifteen days, with the effect and operation of the warrant remaining in abeyance for that period.
Issues: Quashing of non-bailable warrant, stay of further proceedings, and consideration of bail application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the jurisdiction of the court to issue non-bailable warrants, the absence of infirmity or illegality in the impugned order, and the settled law regarding surrender and bail applications.
Final Decision: The application was disposed of with the refusal to quash the non-bailable warrant and stay the proceedings, but with the allowance for the applicant to surrender and apply for bail within fifteen days.
Om Prakash-VII, J.
Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2 has been filed by Shri Kuldeep Saxena, Advocate. Let the same be taken on record.
2. The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the order dated 5.10.2015 issuing non-bailable warrant in case no. 5395 of 2011 (361 of 2014) under Section 326 IPC, Police Station, Kokhraj, District - Kaushambi arising out of summoning order pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the complaint case.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and the learned AGA appearing for the State.
4. A perusal of the record reveals that the summoning order was passed after recording the statement under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. of the complainant as well as the witnesses. Non-bailable warrant was issued when the applicant did not appear before the court concerned despite service of summon. Issuance of non-bailable warrant is within the jurisdiction of the court concerned.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that no case is made out to interfere with the impugned order. There is no infirmity or illegality in the said order. The prayer made in the application is refused.
6. However, it is observed that in case the applicant surrenders and applies for bail within fifteen days from today, the same shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 and affirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC). For a period of fifteen days from today, effect and operation of the N.B.W. shall remain in abeyance.
7. It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicant to surrender before the court concerned.
With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
