Court No. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41854 of 2019 Applicant :- Shiv Dayal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.K.Sachan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing order issuing Non-bailable Warrant dated 30.10.2019 in Sessions Trial No.495 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.127 of 2014 under Sections 307, 326 and 323 I.P.C., Police Station Quoladiya, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, District Bareilly.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant was facing trial in Sessions Trial No.495 of 2017.The applicant was named in the F.I.R., however, final report has been submitted against him. During trial he was summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. which order was challenged before this Court in Criminal Revision No.2314 of 2018 in which notices were issued and impugned order was stayed. However, the interim order was granted for a period of six months only. It appears that the applicant did not get the stay order extended and non-bailable warrant has been issued against him by the court below. An innocuous prayer has been made for quashing of non-bailable warrant. The Court had considered nature of allegations against the applicant and issued notices to opposite party and interim stay order was passed but unfortunately, the same could not be extended.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant and submitted that the interim stay order was effective for six months only and the same was never extended, therefore, the court below is perfectly justified in issuing non- bailable warrant against the applicant.
The prayer for quashing the proceedings as well as order impugned is refused.
Be that as it may, in the light of aforesaid, if the applicant files an application for recalling of the non-bailable-warrant issued against him within 3 weeks from today, the said application may be considered and disposed as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, he appears and surrenders before the court below within 3 weeks from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail may be considered and decided on same day in view of the settled 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 three weeks from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail, whichever is earlier, 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 aforesaid observations this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 MN/-