In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a non-bailable warrant, the applicant submitted to the jurisdiction of the lower court to seek bail instead. The High Court declined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction on these grounds and dismissed the application.
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. - 84
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6176 of 2021
Applicant :- Awdhesh Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradyumna Kumar Yadav,Javed Raza Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dr. Yogendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Heard Sri Manjesh, learned counsel holding brief of Shri P.K. Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arvind Kumar, learned AGA for the StateOpposite party.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the non-bailable warrant dated 03.4.2019 in S.T. No. 154 of 2017 (State Vs Subhash Yadav and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 514 of 2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) D, Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Mohammadabad, District- Ghazipur pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur and further pleased to stay the further proceedings of the Criminal Case having S.T. No. 154 of 2017, (State Vs Subhash Yadav and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 514 of 2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) D, Dha of SC/ST Act, Police StationMohammadabad, District- Ghazipur pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the applicant has sought to quashing of the proceedings by seeking to refer to the factual aspect of the case and the defence which is sought to be set up on behalf of the applicant.
Learned AGA submits that the aforesaid contention would relate to disputed questions of fact and appreciation of evidence, which would be beyond the purview and scope of proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant has not disputed the aforesaid legal position and fairly submits that he does not want to press the relief as prayed for in the present application. Learned counsel states that the applicant would submit to the jurisdiction of the court below and seek bail.
Having regard to the aforesaid, this court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C..
The application stands dismissed .
Order Date :- 22.7.2021 Kirti
(Dr. Y.K. Srivastava, J)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Awdhesh Kumar Yadav
Yogendra Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
