Partly allowed

Laxman v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2024A482/29877/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application filed under Cr.P.C. to quash a non-bailable warrant and criminal proceedings due to lack of notice by the applicant. The court allowed the application on the condition that the applicant appears and moves the trial court for recalling the order within 15 days, suspending coercive action during this interim.

What did the court decide?

Coercive action stayed for 15 days; applicant directed to approach trial court to recall non-bailable warrant order.

Laxman vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:152088

¶2

Court No. - 80

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29877 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Laxman Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the Non Bailable Warrant order dated 07.06.2024 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 1847 of 2012 (Old Case No. 550 of 2005), titled as State v. Laxman, arising out of Case Crime No. 68 of 2004, under Section 3/8 Cow Slaughter Act and 11 (Ka) Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act and Section 207 of Motor Vehcile Act, registered at P.S. Mussoorie Gate, District Ghaziabad, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for applicant submits that impugned order is against the facts and law. The applicant had no knowledge about the proceedings initiated against him due to which he could not appear on the date fixed by the trial Court, hence, non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicant.

¶9

Per contra learned A.G.A has opposed.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, it is directed that in case the applicant appears and move appropriate

¶11

application before the trial Court for recalling the impugned order, the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of 15 days or till the applicant move an application before the trial Court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. Further, the Court shall not entertain the fictitious and repetitive personal exemption application, and if filed, the same shall be dismissed with reasonable costs.

¶12

The application is disposed of accordingly.

¶13

Order Date :- 18.9.2024 A. Tripathi

¶14

Justice Vinod Diwakar

¶15

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Laxman v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman v. State of U.P.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharmendra Alias Dhirendra Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Irshad and Another vs State of Up and Another

Nawab Khan Alias Nawab Ali vs State of U.P. and Another

Arun Jaiswal vs State of U.P. and Another

Niraj @ Banti Shahi and 3 Others vs State of Upand Another

Manoj Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another