Dismissed

Suryabhan and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC17 Feb 2020A482/5141/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a Non-Bailable Warrant issued in an SC/ST Act case, the judge dismissed the prayer as the applicants had failed to comply with a prior court order directing them to seek bail within four weeks. Finding no illegality or abuse of process, the application was rejected as devoid of merits.

What did the court decide?

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. dismissed; order of N.B.W. stands valid.

Suryabhan and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5141 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Suryabhan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Mishra,Rajesh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Harsh Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sharvan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order of Non-Bailable Warrant dated 08.01.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Azamgarh in Spl No 07 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 427 IP.C. and 3(1) (Chha) and Da) SC/ST Act and 4/10 Protection of Tree in Rural and Hill Area Act 1976, P.S. Didarganj, Distinct Azamgarh in Complaint Case No. 306 of 2016 pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Azamgarh

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants contends that applicants have been falsely implicated as a matter of counterblast; that the applicant no.1 is village Pradhan, made a complaint against the opposite party no.2 regarding the encroachment made by her on a vacant land of Gaon Sabha; that, feeling aggrieved, the opposite party no. 2 moved an application under Section 156 (3) Cr. P.C. for lodging the FIR, which was rejected by the Magistrate vide order dated 21.10.2016, which is filed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit; that opposite party no.2 then filed a complaint case against the applicants in which vide order dated 19.01.2019, the learned Special Judge, S.C./ST Act has passed summoning order; that applicants challenged the summoning order dated 19.01.2019 by filing a Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (2) of SC/ST Act which was disposed of vide order dated 14.05.2019, rejecting the prayer for quashing of the order dated 19.01.2019 and permit to the applicants to seek bail within four weeks; that learned Special Judge has issued N.B.W. against the applicants; that the order issuing N.B.W is abuse of process of the Court and is liable to be quashed.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer made in the application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. and contended that the applicants previously approached this Court by filing Appeal under Section 14-A (2) SC/ST Act for

¶10

quashing the summoning order, which was refused, giving four weeks' protection to the applicants to surrender and seek bail; that the applicants did not comply with the order passed by this Court dated 14.05.2019 and have deliberately flouted the order of this Court; that there is no illegality in the order dated 08.01.2020 issuing N.B.W.; that the application is abuse of process of the Court, is liable to be rejected.

¶11

Upon hearing the learned counsel for the applicants and perusal of record, I find that applicants have not honored the order dated 14.05.2019 passed by this Court. Learned counsel for the applicants has failed to show any illegality, irregularity and impropriety in the order impugned. There is nothing on record to show abuse of process of Court and no ground for exercising powers by this Court to safeguard the interest of justice. The application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed.

¶12

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed.

¶13

Order Date :- 17.2.2020

¶14

T.S.

Suryabhan and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suryabhan and 3 Others v. State of Up 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

Rajpal and 7 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Satyam Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Pintoo @ Sanjay Kumar and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vinod Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Dharmendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ajij Ahmad Vs State of Up and Another