Disposed

Anil Gautam and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Jan 2020A482/2888/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a non-bailable warrant (N.B.W.) and entire proceedings. While agreeing no indulgence was made for setting aside the N.B.W. due to the applicants' absence, the Court directed its consideration if they surrender within 30 days.

What did the court decide?

Ordered that no coercive action shall be taken for thirty days or until bail disposal, whichever is earlier, pending appearance before the trial court.

Anil Gautam and Another Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2888 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Anil Gautam And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Geeta Parihar,Asha Parihar,Pratik Chandra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶6

The applicants namely, Anil Gautam and Smt. Nanhi Devi, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of the Court with prayer to quash the N.B.W. order dated 11.01.2019, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. II, District Kanpur Dehat in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2014, (Smt. Shanti Devi vs. Jai Narayan Trivedi and others), under Sections 379, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Billhour, District Kanpur Nagar as well as to quash the entire proceeding of above complaint case.

¶7

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

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that applicants were on bail. But owing to circumstances, not within their control, they could not appear before trial Court, resulting issuance of N.B.W. Hence, for ensuring end of justice, this application has been filed with above prayer.

¶9

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the above prayer.

¶10

Admittedly, applicants could not appear before Court at the date fixed. Hence, ground for N.B.W. was there. Hence, no indulgence by this Court regarding prayer for setting aside N.B.W. is made out.

¶11

However, in the interest of justice, it is provided that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within thirty (30) days from today and apply for bail, then the bail application of the applicants 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 judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.

¶12

For a period of thirty days from today or till the disposal of the

¶13

application for grant of bail, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.

¶14

However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below, within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

¶15

With the aforesaid directions, this application stands disposed of, accordingly.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.1.2020 MN/-

Anil Gautam and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Gautam and Another 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

Balram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Kishore Sharma Vs C.B.I.,Acb

Sunil Kesarwani Vs State of U.P.

Ram Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramu Ji Nirankari Vs State of U.P. and 4 Ors.

Ved Prakash Sharma Vs State of U.P.