This court dismissed an application seeking quashing of an order issued NBW against absent applicants. The court granted 30 days to surrender without coercive action.
Applicants granted 30 days to surrender before the court below without coercive action.
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. - 77
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1696 of 2020
Applicant :- Smt. Maxsi And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Singh,Ganesh Shankar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants Smt. Maxsi and four others, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the order dated 17.4.2019 passed in Complaint Case No. 484 of 1996, Raju Vs. Banwari Lal and others, u/s 494, 498, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Hathras Junction, District Aligarh, whereby NBW has been issued against the applicants.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. representing the State. Perused the records.
A perusal of the record shows that the applicants have successfully avoided to appear before the court concerned during the long span of time despite several orders passed by the court below.
As the applicants became absent from the court proceedings, the court below has rightly issued NBW against them. There is no good ground to interfere in the order impugned issuing NBW against the applicants.
The prayer for quashing the impugned order is refused and the application is dismissed .
However, the applicants are granted a time of thirty days from today to surrender before the court concerned.
In case the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their 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.
For the aforesaid period of 30 days, which shall not be extended any further, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. In case they fail to surrender within the aforesaid period, the court below shall take coercive measures against them.
Order Date :- 18.1.2020
Pcl
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to quash the order of issuing non-bailable warrant against absent applicants.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶11
2004 (57) ALR 290 Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P.
Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶11
2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Smt. Maxsi And 4 Others
Ram Krishna Gautam
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
