Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 46599 of 2019 Applicant :- Deepu And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dr. C.P. Upadhyay,Shubham Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Shri C.P. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicants and in opposition, Shri G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been moved on behalf the applicants with a prayer to quash the order dated 30.11.2019, in S.T. No. 744 of 2018 (State v. Kailash and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 110 of 2013, under Sections 323/34, 504, 506 and 308/34 of I.P.C., Police Station - Jagner, District - Agra, pending in the court of A.D.J./Fast Track Court-I, Agra.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicants that within a short span of 4-6 months' time, the trial court has passed very harsh order of issuing N.B.W. against the accused-applicants and has also cancelled the sureties. The point so raised by learned counsel is that initially engaged counsel Shri Munna Lal Gupta had expired, whereafter another counsel namely, Daljeet, was appointed, who suffered from paralysis and subsequently, few more advocates had been engaged from the side of applicants and it appears that before the trial court, all the accused could not be represented, because of which, the impugned order has been passed, which is too harsh and therefore, it is prayed that the impugned order be quashed.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
I have gone through the F.I.R. and find that the said order has been passed because of non-appearance of the accused as well as their counsel, thus, no illegality could be observed in the said order.
Looking to the fact the applicants have been appearing regularly before the trial court, hence, it is expected of the trial court to consider the case of the applicants sympathetically. Quashing of the impugned order, though is refused, however, 45 days' time is allowed to the accused to appear before the court below to move an application for recall of the said order.
If such an application is moved, the same may be considered in accordance with law sympathetically. However, in case the warrants are not set aside and the said application is rejected, the accused may move bail application, which shall be decided in accordance with law.
For a period of 45 days from today, no coercive measure shall be adopted against the accused-applicants, but in case they do not appear before the court below, coercive steps shall be taken against them.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant application stands disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 I. Batabyal