Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45198 of 2019 Applicant :- Satyaram Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Supplementary affidavit has been filed and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Gaurav Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri, G.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application has been filed with a prayer to direct the court below to dispose of the bail application of the applicant in Special Case No. 775 of 2018, arising out of case crime no. 13 of 2001, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120B, 504, 506 IPC and Section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, P.S. Usawan, District Budaun and further to set aside the order dated 16.11.2019 passed by the learned court of A.D.J./Special Judge (P.C. Act) No.-II Bareilly in the aforementioned case..
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant had no knowledge about this case being pending before the trial court of Bareilly. This case was initiated before the Budaun court and subsequently on 27.2.2018 the case was transferred to Bareilly judgeship from where process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. for attachment of the property has been issued because of the non-appearance of the applicant. He has prayed that right from the beginning he had no knowledge about this case, hence the said order needs to be set aside.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer of setting aside the impugned order and has argued that the applicant is absconding since very long time.
I have gone through the prayer. It is stated in the prayer clause that trial court be directed to consider and dispose of bail application pending in the above mentioned case but when it was enquired from the learned counsel for the applicant as to whether any bail application is pending before the trial court, he candidly admittedly that no such application is pending, hence prayer is misconceived. Accordingly, the same is refused.
As regards the prayer for setting aside the order dated 16.11.2019, the same has been issued in order to procure the attendance of the accused applicant before the trial court as he was not appearing before it but looking to the certified copy of the order sheet, which has been placed on record, it shows that probably the applicant did not have knowledge of this case being pending since long and particularly in view of the fact that proceedings were initiated initially in Budaun and were subsequently transferred to Bareilly, hence it could be possible that he might not be knowing about this case being pending against him or about the date fixed therein but even then because of the fact that process mentioned above has been issued in order to procure his attendance before the trial court, hence quashing of the same is refused. However giving him benefit of doubt, following order is being passed:-
Thirty days time is provided to the applicant to appear before the trial court and seek cancellation of the order dated 16.11.2019 whereby warrant under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued. If such an application is moved, the same would be disposed of in accordance with law. In case the same is rejected and accused moves bail application, the same would be decided in accordance with law. Till thirty days no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the above direction, application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 A.P. Pandey