This application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of a non-bailable warrant was dismissed as a prima facie case existed. The court granted a 30-day moratorium on coercive action if the applicant appeared in 45 days or applied for bail.
Quashing refused; 30-day stay on coercive action granted if applicant appears or seeks bail within 45 days.
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. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14943 of 2019
Applicant :- Neelam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Annapurna Devi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Ms. Annapurna Devi,learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA for the State.
This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with prayer seeking stay/ quashing of the order of Non Bailable Warrants issued against the applicant on 8.1.2019 in Case No. 11944 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 432 of 2018 (State v. Tek Narayan and others) under sections 498A, 304-B, 323 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police StationTronica City, District- Ghzaiabad by CJM, Ghaziabad.
The contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is a Lady and no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purpose of harassment. He pointed out certain documents and statements in support of his contention.
From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. All the submissions made at the Bar relate to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under section 482 Cr.PC. At this stage only prime facie case is to be seen in the light of the law laid down by Supreme Court in cases of R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426, State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 and lastly Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 .
The prayer for quashing the impugned order issuing non-bailable warrant against the applicant in the aforesaid case by the court concerned is refused.
However, it is provided that if the applicant files an application for recalling of the non-bailable warrant issued against her within 45days from today, the said application may be considered and disposed off as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law or in case, the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below within 45 days from today and applies for bail the court below shall consider and decide the bail prayer of applicant in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57)ALR 290, as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2009) 3 ADJ 322 (SC).
For a period of 30 days from today or till 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 do not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against him.
With the above directions, present application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 18.4.2019 ssm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the quashing of an order issuing non-bailable warrant can be granted when a prima facie case is made out.
Whether to grant a stay on coercive action pending disposal of bail or recall of warrant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.P. Kapur v. State of PunjabReferred¶8
R.P. Kapur v. State of Punjab, AIR 1960 SC 866 · Who else cites this
State of Haryana v. Bhajan LalReferred¶8
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 426 · Who else cites this
State of Bihar v. P.P. SharmaReferred¶8
State of Bihar v. P.P.Sharma, 1992 SCC (Cr.) 192 · Who else cites this
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful HaqReferred¶8
Zandu Pharmaceutical Works Ltd. v. Mohd. Saraful Haq and another (Para-10) 2005 SCC (Cr.)283 · Who else cites this
Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P.Referred¶10
Smt. Amarawati and another v. State of U.P., 2004 (57)ALR 290
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar PradeshReferred¶10
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others, (2009) 3 ADJ 322 (SC)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Neelam
State Of U.P.
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
