Single judge dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a non-bailable warrant. The court held the order valid as the applicant was an absconder evading appearance, thus abusing earlier bail benefits.
Prayer for quashing the non-bailable warrant is refused. Application disposed of without expressing opinion on merits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 43 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11972 of 2019 Applicant :- Mohd Saleem Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Umair Mahmood Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the order dated 23.7.2014 passed in Case No. 1589 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2009 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Bijnot (Sri Mahesh Kumar Vs. Saleem) under Section 304-1 and 279 I.P.C. P.S. Nehtaur, District Bijnor.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. He has not committed any offence as alleged against him. The applicant was on bail and being a labourer, he was at Delhi and Bombay in search of a job. Hence, non-bailable warrant dated 23.7.2014 issued against him to be quashed. He further requested for extending the benefit of Judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P .
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. argued that applicant is an absconder and despite issuance of N.B.W. many times, he is not procuring his presence before the court.
A perusal of record shows that the applicant is an absconder and despite issuance of N.B.W. many times, he is evading his presence before the court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any illegality in the impugned order aforesaid as it is misuse of earlier bail. Therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, it will be disposed of on merits in accordance with law. It is clarified that no expressed or implied opinion has been expressed by this Court on merit in the matter.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 30.3.2019/Ram Murti
1 issue framed by the court
Whether quashing of non-bailable warrant issued against an absconder amounts to misuse of earlier bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶5
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.PReferred¶5
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohd Saleem
State Of Up
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
