Disposed

Bhola Nath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Feb 2023/1242/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging non-bailable warrants, the single judge allowed the appellant to file a bail application within 15 days and stayed the warrants for two weeks. The order expired if the appellant failed to appear before the trial court within that period.

What did the court decide?

Stayed the non-bailable warrants for two weeks and directed the applicant to file a bail application within 15 days.

Bhola Nath Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 27

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1242 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Bhola Nath Verma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey,Manoj Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite parties and perused the record.

¶6

Instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant\ with the prayer to quash/set aside the impugned Non Bailable Warrant order dated 22.8.2016 & 19.7.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.4, Sultanpur in Criminal Case No.506 of 2012 arising out of Crime No.1341 of 2008, under Section 2/3 The Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur, State of U.P. Vs. Sanjeev Kumar Singh & others.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter. He next added that matter pertains to the year 2008 and he was kept on appearing before the trial court but after 2019, he went to another city for his livelihood and his counsel could not inform him with respect to the dates fixed in the case. He further submits that non-appearance is not deliberate but that happened in unavoidable circumstances. He also added that the applicant is ready to appear before the trial court and he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid and submits that the present applicant is absent since a long period of time, and as such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief.

¶9

In rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the interest of justice would be sub-surved if the present applicant is permitted to surrender before the court concerned and his bail application may be directed to be considered within the stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this Court.

¶10

Learned counsel submits that the applicant undertakes that he shall appear on each and every date before the trial court concerned and he will not seek any adjournment. He further submits that he will appear before the trial court within a period of two weeks and will apply for bail.

¶11

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the applicant is at liberty to move bail application within fifteen days from the date of this order and if such an application is moved, the same shall be decided expeditiously.

¶12

For the period of two weeks only, the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicant shall remain stayed.

¶13

However, if the applicant does not appear before the court below within the aforesaid period, this order shall stand revoked and no benefit of this order shall accrue to him.

¶14

Order Date :- 27.2.2023 Ram Murti

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAM MURTI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Bhola Nath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhola Nath Verma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. 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

Mr. Laxmikant Srivastava and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and Others

Arun Singh @ Arun Pratap Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home and Another

Mohd. Imran @ Umesh Chaudhary @ Pintoo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Vipin Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others

Mushtaq Ahmad Vs Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh and Another

Meraj and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 2 Others