Court No. - 2
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22635 of 2019 Applicant :- Hamveer Singh And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kant Pandey,Mahabeer Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Shashi Kant Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Vimal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the order of non-bailable warrant dated 3.6.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, District Agra in S.T. No. 499 of 2012 (State Vs. Mahanveer and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 388 of 2010, under Section 307/506 IPC, P.S. Malpura, District Agra, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 12, Agra.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the accused-applicants have been consistently appearing before the trial court but on 3.6.2019 he could not appear because of the reason he has mentioned in paragraph 13 of the affidavit, hence it is prayed that the non-bailable warrant be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of quashing the non- bailable warrant.
I have gone through the order sheet, which has been annexed by the learned counsel for the applicants and it reveals that the case is listed for the defence evidence and on one date i.e. only 3.6.2019 the accused-applicants appear to have defaulted in appearing before the court on count of which the non-bailable warrant has been directed to be issued. Since the said non- bailable warrant has been directed to be issued in order to procure the attendance of the accused, hence no infirmity is found in the impugned order.
Hence, the quashing of the non bailable warrant is refused.
However, it is directed that if the accused-applicants appear before the court and moves an application for recall of the non bailable warrant, the same would be disposed of by the trial court in accordance with law and in case, their recall is not allowed, the bail application of the accused-applicants would be considered in accordance with law. If accused-applicants do not appear within the said period, the protection of 30 days would stand vacated and, thereafter, the trial court would be at liberty to take coercive action against them to secure their presence.
Order Date :- 14.6.2019 A.P. Pandey