Dismissed

Rizwan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2023A482/39390/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash a non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant for failing to appear without explanation over a period of three years despite being on bail.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed as it is wholly misconceived due to inordinate delay without explanation.

Rizwan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39390 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rizwan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

By means of present application, the applicant has challenged the order dated 17.10.2019 in S.T. No. 163 of 2017 (State vs. Rizwan) arising out of Case Crime No. 305 of 2016, under Section 307 IPC, P.S. Garhmukteshwar, District- Hapur, pending in the court of Addl. District Judge/F.T.C.-II, Hapur, by which the non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the instant case, the applicant has already been released on bail. Subsequently, the applicant did not appear before the court below and non bailable warrant was issued against the applicant on 17.10.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that applicant had no knowledge about the said impugned order and, as such, the present proceedings be quashed.

¶8

Learned AGA has submitted that non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant on 17.10.2019, however despite lapse of 3 years, the applicant did not appear before the Court and, as such the present proceedings cannot be quashed.

¶9

Having considered the rival submissions made by the counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the fact that non bailable warrant has been issued vide order dated 17.10.2019, yet the applicant did not appear before the Court due to unavoidable circumstances is wholly untenable. No worthy explanation for this inordinate delay is coming forth.

¶10

In view of the above, the present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is wholly misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.

¶11

Order Date :- 19.1.2023 KU

¶12

Digitally signed by :- KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rizwan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan 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

Zameel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhruv Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vimal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Urmila Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhirendra Kumar Vs State of U.P and 2 Others