Disposed

Mohd. Husain Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jun 2018A482/21328/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the quashing petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging a non-bailable warrant issued for non-appearance in a complaint case under Section 406 IPC. However, the court directed that the applicant be granted bail upon appearance and surrender within 45 days.

What did the court decide?

Discharge of bail application petition; direction to consider bail application within 45 days of appearance and surrender.

Mohd. Husain Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2018) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21328 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mohd. Husain Ansari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mazhar Shakeel,Archana Agrawal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J .

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant on 17th April, 2018 in complaint case 1234 of 2014(Girdhari Vs. Mohd. Husain) under Section 406 I.PC. P.S. -Kotwali Katra, District- Mirzapur pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur is being challenged in this petition.

¶7

It is stated that complaint at its best discloses existence of a commercial dispute and the criminal proceedings initiated are an abuse of process of law.

¶8

The petition is opposed by the learned A.G.A.

¶9

A perusal of the record would go to show that the applicant had earlier filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being No. 20246 of 2016 in which initially a stay order was granted but the application has ultimately been dismissed for want of prosecution on 7.3.2018. According to the learned counsel for the applicant, the restoration application is pending.

¶10

It is in this circumstance that non-bailable warrant has been issued. There is no illegality in issuing the non-bailable warrant to the applicant, as neither he has appeared nor has he been enlarged on bail. Prayer for quashing the non-bailable warrant is, therefore, declined.

¶11

However, in view of the entirety of facts and circumstances of the case, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days and no more from today and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided 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.

¶12

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of .

¶13

Order Date :- 15.6.2018

¶14

A. Pt. Singh

Mohd. Husain Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Husain Ansari v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Yogendra Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ajay Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rahul Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Durgvijay and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Sajid Vs State of U.P. and Another

Afaq and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another