Nippe Alias Nirpati vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Nippe Alias Nirpati vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of without itself quashing the warrant: trial Court to decide any recall application moved by the applicant expeditiously in accordance with law, with interim protection that no coercive action be taken against the applicant for 15 days or until such application is moved, whichever is earlier; fictitious/repetitive personal exemption applications to be dismissed with reasonable costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-bailable warrant order dated 04.12.2024 passed in G.S.T. No. 1026 of 2019 should be quashed, given the applicant's claim that he noted the wrong date of hearing due to confusion and therefore could not appear before the trial Court.

Court's answer

If the applicant appears and moves an appropriate application before the trial Court for recalling the impugned non-bailable warrant order, that application shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law.

Ratio / Principle

Interim protection: for a period of 15 days, or until the applicant moves an application before the trial Court (whichever is earlier), no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

Key takeaways

The Court shall not entertain fictitious and repetitive personal exemption applications; if such an application is filed, it shall be dismissed with reasonable costs.ratio¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Section 482 Cr.P.C. application (No. 2095 of 2025) by Nippe alias Nirpati before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Vinod Diwakar, J.; Order Date 22.1.2025) seeking quashing of the Non Bailable Warrant order dated 04.12.2024 passed in G.S.T. No. 1026 of 2019, titled State v. Nippe @ Nirpati, arising out of Case Crime No. 190 of 2018 under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Shikohabad, District Firozabad, pending before the Special Additional Sessions Judge-IX (Gangsters), Firozabad. Counsel submitted the applicant missed the fixed date due to confusion in noting the hearing date, prompting the NBW. The Court did not itself quash the warrant; it disposed of the application directing that if the applicant appears and moves an appropriate recall application before the trial Court, it be decided expeditiously in accordance with law; that for 15 days or till such application is moved (whichever is earlier) no coercive action be taken against the applicant; and that fictitious and repetitive personal exemption applications shall not be entertained and, if filed, shall be dismissed with reasonable costs.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:11285

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2095 of 2025

Applicant :- Nippe Alias Nirpati Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Chandra Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.

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

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the Non Bailable Warrant order dated 04.12.2024 in G.S.T. No. 1026 of 2019, titled State v. Nippe @ Nirpati, arising out of Case Crime No.190 of 2018, under Section 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, P.S. Shikohabad, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of Special Additional Sessions Judge-IX (Gangsters) Firozabad.

Learned counsel for applicant submits that impugned order is against the facts and law. Due to confusion, the applicant noted wrong date of hearing in the present case due to which he could not appear on the date fixed by the trial Court, hence, non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicant.

Per contra, learned A.G.A has opposed.

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

The application is disposed of accordingly.

Order Date :- 22.1.2025 A. Tripathi

Justice Vinod Diwakar

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