Amit Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Amit Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application disposed of with a direction that the applicant appear before the court below within three weeks and apply for bail/recall of the NBW, his application to be decided in the light of the cited Supreme Court judgments (Satender Kumar Antil, Siddharth, Aman Preet Singh); execution of the NBW kept in abeyance for three weeks or till the applicant's appearance, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant by order dated 25.03.2022 should be quashed, on the applicant's plea that it was issued without service of summons or bailable warrant and directly after filling blanks. +1 more

Court's answer

The application is finally disposed of with a direction that if the applicant appears before the court below within three weeks and applies for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the Supreme Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth v. State of U.P. 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

Ratio / Principle

Execution of the non-bailable warrant against the applicant is kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from the date of the order or until the applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.) disposed of an application under Section 528 BNSS (referred to in the operative portion as under Section 482 Cr.P.C.) by Amit Chauhan seeking quashing of a non-bailable warrant dated 25.03.2022 issued by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Etah in Criminal Case No. 3735 of 2003 (Case Crime No. 854 of 2002, Sections 406, 409, 420 IPC). The Court directed that if the applicant appears before the trial court within three weeks and applies for bail/recall of the NBW, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth v. State of U.P. (2022) 11 SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh v. CBI 2021 SCC Online SC 941, and kept execution of the NBW in abeyance for three weeks or until appearance, whichever is earlier. The Court did not itself adjudicate the contention that the NBW was issued without service of summons/bailable warrant.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:50044

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11047 of 2025

Applicant :- Amit Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhakar Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.

Sri Prabhakar Pal, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri S.P.Maurya, learned Brief Holder for the State are present.

The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S has been filed to quash the order dated 25.03.2022 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 17, Etah in criminal case no. 3735 of 2003 (State Vs. Amit Chauhan and others) in Case Crime No. 854 of 2002, under Sections 406, 409, 420 of I.P.C. whereby NBW has been issued against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was on bail at the time of issuance of N.B.W. Learned counsel for the applicant fairly admits that earlier to the present petition, the applicant has filed another application under Section 482 No. 28959 of 2018 for quashing of N.B.W. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without satisfying itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served without issuing any summon or bailable warrant direct NBW has been issued after filling the blanks.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and law provided in this regard. It is further submitted that order of the non-bailable warrants has been passed without satisfying the service of summons or bailable warrants.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.

Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of with a direction that in case applicant appears before the court below within three weeks from today and applies for bail/recall of non

bailable warrant, his application shall be shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

For a period of three weeks from today or till applicant appear before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant against applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

Order Date :- 7.4.2025 PS

Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad