Criminal Procedure – Quashing Proceedings
High Court dismissed the capitular prayer to quash proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. but stayed non-bailable warrants conditionally, allowing the applicant to apply for bail within three weeks.
Non-bailable warrants stayed conditionally; applicant permitted to apply for bail within three weeks.
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. - 6847 of 2023
Applicant :- Shyam Mohan Tiwari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Vikram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
List revised.
Heard Sri Ajay Vikram Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri U.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Shyam Mohan Tiwari, with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 4651 of 2019 (New No.201/2022), Amit vs. Shyam Mohan Tiwari, dated 18.8.2017 along with impugned summoning order dated 12.6.2019 passed by learned IInd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri as well as order dated 21.6.2022 issuing non bailable warrants in Complaint Case No. 4651 of 2019 (New No.201/2022), Amit vs. Shyam Mohan Tiwari, under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri and with the further prayer to stay the further proceeding of the said complaint case, pending in the court of learned Special Judicial Magistrate, Mainpuri, during pendency of the present application.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant states that he does not want to press the prayer for quashing of the entire proceeding/summoning order/non bailable warrants. He states that the purpose of the applicant would be served if he is permitted to appear before the trial court within a period of three weeks from today and file a regular bail application but till then the non-bailable warrants as issued may be kept in abeyance. It is argued that non-bailable warrants have been issued vide order dated 21.6.2022 passed by the trial court.
Learned counsel for the State has no objection of aforesaid arguments of learned counsel for the applicants.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing of entire proceeding/summoning order/non bailable warrants is dismissed as not pressed.
However, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and looking to the limited prayer of learned counsel for the applicant, it is directed that if the accused-applicant appears and applies for bail before the court concerned within three weeks from today, the same shall be considered and decided in accordance with law. Till the aforesaid period, the non-bailable warrants shall be kept in abeyance.
It it clarified that if the accused-applicant does not appear before the court concerned by the said date, the court concerned shall proceed against him in accordance with law.
It is further clarified that no application for extension of time as granted by this Court shall be entertained.
The present application is disposed of.
(Samit Gopal,J.)
Order Date :- 22.3.2023 Naresh
Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to quash criminal proceedings or stay non-bailable warrants compulsorily.
Whether leave to appear for bail application within three weeks can serve as an alternative relief.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shyam Mohan Tiwari
State of U.P.
Samit Gopal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
