Arun Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:22396

Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1199 of 2025 Appellant :- Arun Kumar Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Avinash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A for the State-respondent No.1 and perused the material available on record.

¶4

In view of the order which is proposed to be passed today, notice to respondent No.2 is dispensed with.

¶5

The instant criminal appeal under Section 14A(1) of SC/ST Act has been filed by the appellant with a prayer to set aside the entire proceedings of the Sessions Trial No.489/2010(State vs. Shashvat Pandey and Ors.) arising out of Case Crime No.632/2009,under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh and chargesheet dated 22.10.2009 as well as impugned order dated 25.08.2022 along with consequential impugned order dated 10.03.2025 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), District Pratapgarh whereby Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against the appellant.

¶6

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant could not appear before the learned trial court due to some unavoidable circumstances. He has also submitted that the process of non-bailable warrant issued against the appellant is in contravention of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2012) 9 SCC 791 and in Inder Mohan Goswami and another vs. State of Uttaranchal and others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1.

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. controverts the submissions of learned counsel for the appellant on the ground that this is not a stage where minute and meticulous exercise with regard to the appreciation of evidence may be done and truthfulness of the allegations could only be tested in a criminal trial. At this initial stage, the fact of innocence of the appellant can also not be determined.

¶8

On the basis of the aforesaid, he submits that no interference with the non-bailable warrant order dated 17.09.2024 and

¶9

proceedings is warranted at this stage and, therefore, the application is misconceived and is liable to be dismissed.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of record, it transpires that at this stage, there is no material available on record to reveal as to how and under what circumstances, the impugned non-bailable warrant order dated 17.09.2024 came to be issued against the appellant. Therefore, the instant application seeking quashing of impugned chargesheet dated 14.10.2009 as well as impugned summoning order dated 25.08.2022 lacks merit which deserves to be declined.

¶11

Learned counsel for appellant has also enclosed a criminal history of three cases being Case No. 24/2019, Under Section 8/20 NDPS Act, Case No. 541/2017, Under Section 8/20 NDPS Act and Case No. 605/2012, Under Section 8/22 NDPS Act. All pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh where the appellant has been released on bail.

¶12

However, it is needless to mention here that in the eventuality of filing of any application by the appellant for cancellation of process issued against him/ praying for bail within four weeks from today, the learned trial court concerned shall dispose of such application on its own merits keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin' case (supra), Inder Mohan Goswami's case (supra) and Satender Kumar Antill vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others reported in MANU/SC/1024/2021 by keeping the process(s), which was issued against the appellant, in abeyance for the aforesaid period only.

¶13

It is made clear that in case the present appellant fails to avail the benefit as aforesaid within the stipulated period, the same shall automatically cease to exist without any further reference to this Court.

¶14

With the aforesaid observations, the instant appeal is finally disposed of.

¶15

(Alok Mathur, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 21.4.2025/Ravi/

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arun Kumar Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Tiwari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kalveer @ Brahmyuman and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Nafisul Hasan @ Nafisul Hasan Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Saurabh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shariba Parveen Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Satya Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Surendra Kumar Goswami Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another