Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28371 of 2019 Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard Sri Anoop Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of complaint case no. 3659 of 2013 (Geeta Devi vs. Krishna Kumar and others) and summoning order dated 30.04.2014 as well as non- bailable warrant order dated 29.08.2018, under Sections 323, 494 IPC, P.S. Kaptanganj, District Basti passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-I Court No.12, Basti, pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate-I, Court No.12, Basti.
Perusal of the record shows that in the above stated case the applicant was on bail but during trial he has absconded. Since 29.08.2018 non-bailable warrants are continuously being issued against him but he has not appeared before the trial court and he is continuously absconding since 29.08.2018.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that prima facie no offence is disclosed against the applicant. It was submitted that opposite party no.2 has not clarified as to with whom he has solemnized second marriage. The name of the alleged second wife has also not been disclosed. It was submitted that impugned complaint and proceedings are abuse of process of law.
Learned A.G.A. opposed and argued that non-bailable warrants are being issued against the applicant since last one year but he did not appear before the trial court and that there is no illegality in the impugned order.
The above stated Session Trial is pending since year 2013 and applicant/accused is continuously absconding since 29.08.2018. Learned counsel for the applicant failed to indicate any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. It is well settled that powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. have to be exercised to secure ends of justice or to prevent an abuse of the process of any Court. The use of extraordinary powers conferred under this section are required to be reserved, as far as possible for extraordinary cases. Further legality or propriety of such type of interlocutory orders, like issuance of non-bailable warrant, in normal course of trial, cannot be examined in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. unless it is necessary to secure ends of justice or to prevent an abuse of the process of the Court. The inherent powers do not confer any arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act upon whims or caprices. The powers have to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases.
Further the learned counsel for the applicant has failed to demonstrate any patent illegality which may amount to the abuse of process of law and would lead miscarriage of justice or gross injustice.
Needless to state that if an application is moved by the applicant for cancellation of non-bailable warrant, the same shall be dealt with by the court concerned in accordance with law.
In view of the aforesaid, there appears no justification to interfere with the impugned order.
The application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is bereft of merit and is, accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 A. Tripathi