Court No. - 83
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28505 of 2019
Applicant :- Nirmala Katara And 3 Ors
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Upadhyay,Rajesh Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 25.6.2019 issuing non- bailable warrants against the applicants in the Criminal Complaint Case No. 691 of 2016 (Smt. Monu Vs. Pramod Kumar Katara and others) under Sections 323, 498-A and 506 of IPC, Police Station Kotwali, Hathras, District Hathras passed by learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division)/Fast Tract Court, Hathras.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that the applicants could not file the discharge application within a period of one month as directed by this Court vide order dated 3.5.2019 passed in Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 17196 of 2019 and thus, the learned trial court has issued non-bailable warrants against them. It was pointed out that no coercive action has been taken against husband Pramod Kumar Katara while non-bailable warrants have been issued against the applicants without assigning any appropriate reasons. Learned counsel has stated that applicant no. 1 Nirmala Katara is mother-in-law of the opposite party no. 2 Smt. Monu while applicant no. 2 Durgesh Sharma and applicant no. 3 Laxmi Katara are Nandoi and applicant no. 4 Suresh Katara is brother of husband. It was also pointed out that parties have compromised the matter.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.
Perusal of the record shows that applicants were given liberty to move an application for discharge by order dated 3.5.2019 passed by this Court in application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 17196 of 2019 but the applicants did not comply the same and thus, non-bailable warrants were issued against them vide impugned order dated 25.6.2019. Learned counsel for the applicants failed to indicate any illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. It is well settled that power 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 circumstances and in the rarest of rare cases.
The prayer as made above is hereby refused.
However, considering the entire facts and also taking into consideration the fact that applicants are mother in law, sister- in-law and brother of the husband of the opposite party no. 2, this application is finally disposed off with a direction that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within a period of 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law including the law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the applicants surrender in the court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Courts below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.
Order Date :- 22.8.2019 Mohit