The High Court dismissed the applicant's plea to quash the summons, dismissal of revision, and non-bailable warrant. Instead, granting protection to surrender to a trial court within two weeks and stay the warrant for that period.
Non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for two weeks; applicant directed to surrender within that period.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192804
Court No. - 88
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28379 of 2023
Applicant :- R.N. Dhama Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Shishodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party no.1 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the order dated 03.01.1998 by which the applicant has been summoned, order dated 06.03.1999 passed in Criminal Revision No. 443 of 1998 by which the revision was dismissed, order dated 15.03.2022 by which non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant and proceeding of Case No. 3200/9 of 1997 (Mahendra Vs. Virendra Kumar Sharma and others), under Sections 343, 218, 511, 468 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Muzaffar Nagar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffar Nagar.
Brief facts of the case which are required to be stated are that in the present case, opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint on 22.08.1997, in which the applicant was summoned vide order dated 03.01.1998 to face trial under Sections 343, 513, 210, 468 IPC. The said summoning order was challenged by the applicant in Criminal Revision No. 443 of 1998 before the Court of Ist Additional District and Sessions Judge, Muzaffar Nagar, which was dismissed vide order dated 06.03.2019. Against both the aforesaid orders, the applicants filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 662 of 1999, in which further proceeding of Case No. 2856/IX of 1998 pending before the concerned Court
below was stayed vide order dated 22.03.1999. Later on, the said application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 14.09.2011 but the said order was not brought to the knowledge of concerned Court below and the matter was kept pending. After 11 years of dismissal of aforesaid application, trial Court proceeded with the matter and issued a non-bailable warrant against the applicant on 15.03.2022, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present application.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that order of dismissal of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 662 of 1999 was not communicated to the applicant by his counsel, therefore, he could not appear before the trial Court. However, learned counsel for the applicant after advancing his arguments at some length and putting certain query by the Court with regard to inordinate delay in filing this application, gave up his challenge to the aforesaid orders dated 03.01.1998, 06.03.1999 and non-bailable warrant dated 15.03.2022 against the applicant by contending at the Bar that he is not pressing the prayer made in this application on merits and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicant to surrender before the concerned Court below.
Learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. submits that in case the applicant is not pressing the relief as sought for by him on merits and wants to surrender before the concerned court below, he has no objection if the Court grants protection to him for a short period.
In view of the above, the relief as sought by the applicant in the instant application is refused.
However, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that the applicant shall surrender before the concerned Court below within two weeks from today and in case applies for bail, the bail application of the applicant shall be disposed of expeditiously by the Courts below in accordance with law and keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court
in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 922.
For the period of two weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicant before the concerned Court below, whichever is earlier, nonbailable warrant dated 15.03.2022 shall be kept in abeyance.
With the above observations and directions, this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.10.2023 Shubham
Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a protection for surrender can be granted in lieu of the substantive prayer to quash the orders of summoning, dismissal of revision, and issuance of non-bailable warrant.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherExplained¶14
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 922 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
R.N. Dhama
State of U.P.
Sanjay Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
