Allowed

Imtiyaz v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2022A482/28021/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the applicant's application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a non-bailable warrant and Section 82 proceedings, holding them illegal due to lack of service of summons, and directed the accused to appear within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the non-bailable warrant and proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C.; direction to appear within three weeks.

Imtiyaz Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28021 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Imtiyaz Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Kumar,Rajeev Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This criminal misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned non-bailable warrant and proceeding under section 82 Cr.P.C. dated 13.08.2021, issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad, in Case No.4442 of 2001 (Imtiyaj Vs. State), arising out of Case Crime No.420 of 2000, under sections 332, 353, 506, IPC, Police Station Civil Lines, District Allahabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad.

¶7

Applicant is an accused in the aforesaid case. It is submitted by leaned counsel for the applicant that during the course of investigation the applicant-accused was enlarged on bail. After submission of the charge sheet he has not received any information, neither any summon nor any other process was served on him. He was not aware about the proceeding, hence could not appear before the court below. Learned court below has issued non-bailable warrant and proceeding under section 82 Cr.P.C. against the accused-applicant in arbitrary and illegal manner.

¶8

The order sheet (Annexure No.7) reveals that charge sheet was submitted on 17.02.2001 and cognizance was take by learned court below on it by issuing summon. Perusal of order sheet does not reveals that summon was ever served on the

¶9

accused-applicant and without this the learned court below has issued bailable warrant and without ensuring its execution on the accused-applicant, has issued non-bailable warrant and thereafter proceeding under section 82 Cr.P.C.

¶10

The procedure adopted by the learned court below is not just and proper. The learned court below should have ensure the service of summon/bailable warrant and then may have pass the order of issuance of non-bailable warrant and proceeding under section 82 Cr.P.C. against the accused-applicant, hence the nonbailable warrant and process under section 82 Cr.P.C. suffers from manifest illegality and is liable to be quashed.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the criminal misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶12

The order of issuance of non-bailable warrant and process under section 82 Cr.P.C. against the accused-applicant, are hereby quashed.

¶13

However, it is directed that accused-applicant will appear before the court below within three weeks from today, failing which the learned court below will proceed in accordance with law.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.3.2022 VKG

¶15

Digitally signed by VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA Date: 2022.03.08 15:38:11 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Imtiyaz v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imtiyaz 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

Shareef Ahmad @ Shareef Kuraishi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Zaki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Salim Husain Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vivek Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prabhu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another