The court rejected an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of NBWs, holding the application against a deceased person was not maintainable and this court was not the proper forum for recalling warrants.
Prayer to recall non-bailable warrants is rejected as the application is not maintainable.
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. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40332 of 2022
Applicant :- Satish Singh @ Gogi And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamla Prasad Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Learned counsel for the applicants is present. He has prayed to quash the NBW dated 14.11.2022 issued against him by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pilibhit in Complaint Case No. 238 of 2001 (Prithviraj Vs. Ramlubhaya and others) under Sections 420, 468, 467, 471 IPC Police Station Kotwali, District Pilibhit. It is prayed that in the proceedings under Section 229B of UPZA & LR Act, the case of the applicants was decreed. Against the decreetal order dated 19.11.2019 the applicant no. 1 filed an appeal before the Commissioner. After some time, Complaint Case No. 238/9/2001 was also filed by the opposite party no. 2 regarding same incident. As his complaint was barred by Section 195 Cr.P.C., so an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. was filed before this court, wherein this Cour was pleased to pass the stay order staying the proceedings of the complaint Case No. 238 of 2001. In the year 2013 this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. of the applicant was dismissed in default and with the dismissal of this application the interim order passed in favour of the applicants also came to an end. Though, his restoration application is pending and the applicants informed the trial court about their restoration application but even then the NBWs have been issued against the applicants. Hence, prayer is made to recall their NBWs issued against the applicants.
Sri Mahendra Singh Yadav, learned Advocate, appeared on behalf of Ram Kumari w/o Prathivraj - opposite party no. 2 and submitted before the court that Prathviraj, the original complainant has died in the year 2005 and in this regard his application before the trial court in Complaint Case No. 238 of 2001 is pending. This fact that the opposite party no. 2 has died, is admitted to the learned counsel for the applicants but even then he has impleaded Prathviraj as opposite party no. 2 in the present application.
The application against the dead person is not maintainable. Otherwise also, this court is not a proper forum to recall or quash the non bailable warrants issued against the applicants. The applicants may appear before the proper forum and ask for
the relief there.
The vakalatnama of Sri Mahendra Singh Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Ram Kumari w/o Prathviraj, is not on record because Ram Kumari has not been made party here but it is admitted that Prathviraj has died and Ram Kumari is his wife. So, Sri Mahendra Singh Yadav, learned Advocate, is directed to get his impleadment application decided at the earliest before the trial court.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being not maintainable is hereby rejected .
Order Date :- 27.1.2023 gp
Digitally signed by :- GANESH PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the court has jurisdiction to recall or quash the non-bailable warrants issued against the applicants.
Whether an application against a deceased person is maintainable.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Satish Singh @ Gogi And Others
Sadhna Rani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
