Court No. - 38
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16436 of 2019 Applicant :- Anjul Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
By means of the present application, the applicant has filed this application with a prayer to quash the order dated 20.3.2010 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in case crime no.3494 of 2012, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 326 I.P.C, police station Uttar, District Firozabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. He has submitted that there is no complicity of the applicant in the alleged offence. He has further submitted that the F.I.R was lodged in case crime No.299 of 2002, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 326 I.P.C against him wherein the final report was submitted on the protest petition. The applicant was summoned on 15.2.2001, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 326 I.P.C. Against the said summoning order the petition was filed by the applicant wherein the proceeding was stayed by this Court on 10.8.2001 but the same was dismissed on 11.9.2015. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that during pending of the petition, non-bailable warrant was issued against the application on 20.3.2010 which is illegal.
Learned A.G.A has vehemently opposed the submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the applicant is absconding since 2002 and he is not appearing before the trial court even after dismissal of the writ petition.
Hon'ble Supreme Court in State (NCT of Delhi) Vs. Shiv Kumar Yadav (2016)1 SCC (Crl) 510, has held that 'the power of judicial superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution and Section 482 Cr.P.C has to be exercised sparingly when there is patent error or gross injustice in the view taken by a subordinate court.'
From the perusal of record that vide order dated 10.8.2001 passed by the High Court in Crl. Misc. Writ Petition No.5067 of 2001, the proceeding pending was stayed for next date of listing. Learned counsel for the applicant has not produced document or material whereby it can presume that petition was not listed thereafter or it listed on subsequent date and whether stay order was extended or not.
All the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant regarding his innocence relates to disputed question of fact which can be raised before the court below at appropriate stage.
From perusal of material available on record, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. Prima facie there is no evidence or material regarding the abuse of process of law or gross injustice.
In view of the above the matter is pending since 2001 and the applicant is still not appearing before the learned Magistrate despite several process of non-bailable warrant issued against him. The application under section 482 Cr.P.C filed by the applicant has no merit and is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears/surrenders before the Court concerned within thirty days from today and applies for bail in the aforesaid case, his prayer for bail shall be considered by the court below expeditiously in accordance with law.
With the aforesaid direction/observation, the instant application finally stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 G.S