Habiburrahman Alias Laddu vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Habiburrahman Alias Laddu vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant, a charge-sheeted accused who was enlarged on anticipatory bail by order dated 01.10.2019 but repeatedly failed to appear before the Court below, seeking quashing of the non-bailable warrant dated 01-11-2022 and the proclamations under Sections 82/83 Cr.P.C. dated 05-01-2023 and 03-04-2023, deserves to be entertained.

Court's answer

The preliminary objection raised by the learned A.G.A. - that the applicant, though enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 01.10.2019, repeatedly failed to appear before the Court below, leading to issuance of the non-bailable warrant dated 01.11.2022 and coercive process under Sections 82/83 Cr.P.C., and holding up the trial - is clearly borne out from the record and could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage; consequently, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.

Ratio / Principle

As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed, and it is accordingly dismissed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Hon'ble Rajeev Misra, J.), by order dated 6.2.2025 in Application U/S 482 No. 3635 of 2025 (Neutral Citation 2025:AHC:17118), dismissed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed by Habiburrahman Alias Laddu, a charge-sheeted accused in Criminal Case No. 2686 of 2020 'State Vs. Habiburrahman @Laddu' under sections 376, 315, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Dumariyaganj, District Siddharthnagar, which sought quashing of the non-bailable warrant dated 01-11-2022 and the proclamations under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. dated 05-01-2023 and 03-04-2023 issued by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar. The learned A.G.A. objected that although the applicant had been enlarged on anticipatory bail by the High Court vide order dated 01.10.2019, he repeatedly chose not to appear before the Court below; the non-bailable warrant (order dated 01.11.2022) and coercive process under Sections 82/83 Cr.P.C. followed, and the trial proceedings stood held up on account of his lackadaisical approach. When confronted, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the objection. The Court found the preliminary objection clearly borne out from the record, held that no good ground existed to entertain the application, and dismissed it. No relief was granted and no costs or directions were issued.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:17118

Court No. - 71

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3635 of 2025

Applicant :- Habiburrahman Alias Laddu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Kuldeep Kumar Gupta, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.

Perused the record.

Applicant-Habiburrahman Alias Laddu, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following relief:-

"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the impugned order dated 01-11-2022, issuing Non Bailable Warrant, as against the Applicant, the order dated 05-01-2023 whereby the proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. and the order dated 03-04-2023 whereby the proclamation under section 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued as against the applicant, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar in Criminal Case No. 2686 of 2020 "State Vs. Habiburrahman @Laddu" under sections 376, 315, 323 I.P.C. Police Station Dumariyaganj Police Station Dumariyaganj. District Siddharthnagar.

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation eration of the impugned order dated 01-11-2022, issuing Non Bailable Warrant, as against the Applicant, the order dated 05-01-2023 whereby the proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. and the order dated 0304-2023 whereby the proclamation under section 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued as against the applicant, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siddharthnagar in Criminal Case No. 2686 of 2020 "State Vs. Habiburrahman @ Laddu" under sections 376, 315, 323 I.P.C. Police Station Dumariyaganj Police Station Dumariyaganj, District Siddharthnagar and further direct the

authorities not to take any coercive steps as against the Applicant during the pendency of the present application or to pass any order which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that inspite of the fact that applicant was enlarged on anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 01.10.2019, applicant has chosen not to appear before Court below repeatedly. In view of above, non-bailable warrant was issued against applicant by Court below vide order 01.11.2022. Even though a period of more than 2 years and 3 months has rolled by, applicant has not yet appeared before Court below. Consequently, the proceedings of trial have been held up on account of lackadaisical approach of applicant in participating in the trial. On account of failure of applicant to appear before Court below coercive process under Sections 82/83 Cr.P.C. has also been issued by Court below against applicant. On the above premise, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that no interference is warranted by this Court in present application.

When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the preliminary objection raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application is clearly borne out from the record and furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.

As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

It is, accordingly, dismissed .

Order Date :- 6.2.2025 Imtiyaz

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad