Partly allowed

Tinku @ Jaswant v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2020A482/2826/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application to quash criminal proceedings and stay a non-bailable warrant order, the Court refused the quash prayer but directed the applicant to surrender within 15 days and apply for bail, keeping the warrant operative only during that period.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash refused. Order disposed with direction to surrender within 15 days and apply for bail; non-bailable warrant stayed for 15 days.

Tinku @ Jaswant Vs State of U.P.and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2826 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Tinku @ Jaswant Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as non-bailable warrant order dated 20.6.2019 passed by Additional Session Judge IV, Auraiya in Session Trial No.8 of 2016 arising out of case crime no.127 of 2016 under sections 3 (1) U.P. Gangster & Antisocial Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Bela, District Auraiya pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge IV, Auraiya. Further prayer has been made to stay the effect and operation of aforesaid non-bailable warrant order.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the reasons on account of which the applicant failed to appear before the trial court were beyond their control and the applicant has every intention to appear before the court concerned and participate in the proceedings of the trial.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State opposed the prayer.

¶9

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the impugned order as well as material brought on record and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, I do not find any good ground to quash the impugned order. The prayer made in the application is refused.

¶10

However, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the application is disposed of with a direction to the applicant to surrender before the court below within 15 days from today and apply for bail, which shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law. For a period of 15 days from today, effect and operation of non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

¶11

In case of default, the Court below will be at liberty to take all coercive steps against the applicant for ensuring his appearance.

¶12

With the aforesaid observations, the application is disposed of.

¶13

Order Date :- 21.1.2020 ss

Tinku @ Jaswant v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tinku @ Jaswant 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Brahmdev Chaudhary and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Jatav and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanavvar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prashant Keshri and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Safeek Ahmad Vs State of U.P.and 4 Others