Disposed¶17

Javed Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Sept 2025NA528/18243/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: Section 528 BNSS application; quashing of non-bailable warrant; NBW dated 20.06.2024; Special Case No.126 of 2020; Case Crime No.1414 of 2019; Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC; 3/4 POCSO Act; Police Station Phase III; Gautam Buddh Nagar; bail jumping; counsel non-appearance; vakalatnama not withdrawn; 30-day arrest protection; trial court sympathetic consideration; Allahabad High Court; Avnish Saxena. One-liner: NBW-quashing plea under S.528 BNSS disposed of with a 30-day non-arrest window and a request that the trial court decide sympathetically despite repeated bail defaults.

What did the court decide?

30-day protection from arrest so that the applicant may file an NBW-recall or bail application before the trial court; the NBW itself was not quashed by this Court. ¶17

Javed Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

30-day protection from arrest so that the applicant may file an NBW-recall or bail application before the trial court; the NBW itself was not quashed by this Court.

¶17

Issue for consideration

Whether the non-bailable warrant dated 20.06.2024 issued in Special Case No.126 of 2020 against the applicant should be quashed, given that his absence resulted from his counsel's non-appearance (vakalatnama not withdrawn) while he professed willingness to face trial.

¶8

Court's answer

The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. was disposed of; the Court did not quash the non-bailable warrant.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

Interim protection granted: the applicant may not be arrested for 30 days, within which period he may move an appropriate application (NBW-recall or bail, as the case may be) before the trial court.

¶15

Key takeaways

Trial court requested to consider that the accused was represented by a Counsel who neither appeared nor moved an exemption application and whose vakalatnama was not withdrawn, to weigh the reason for his absence while on release on bail, and to pass the order sympathetically.obiter¶16
Caution recorded alongside the sympathetic-consideration request: successive jumping of bail by the applicant is not to be ignored.obiter¶16
The Court decided there was no point of issuing notice upon opposite party no.4.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad HC (Avnish Saxena, J.), September 4, 2025 - Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 18243 of 2025 (Javed Khan v. State of U.P. & 3 Ors.) seeking quashing of the NBW dated 20.06.2024 issued in Special Case No.126 of 2020 (Case Crime No.1414 of 2019; Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act; PS Phase III, Gautam Buddh Nagar) was DISPOSED OF, not quashed. Counsel blamed the warrant on counsel-side failure (no appearance/exemption, vakalatnama unwithdrawn), noting the applicant wished to face trial while the prosecution failed to produce witnesses. The Court protected the applicant from arrest for 30 days to file an NBW-recall or bail application before the trial court, asked it to weigh the absence-on-bail reason sympathetically, but cautioned that successive bail-jumping would not be ignored; no notice was issued to OP-4.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18243 of 2025

¶3

Javed Khan

¶4

	Versus	.....Applicant(s)
State Of U.P. And 3 Others		.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)		: Syed Ali Imam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)		: G.A.

¶5

Court No. - 79

¶6

HON'BLE AVNISH SAXENA, J.

¶7

Sri Syed Ali Imam, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been moved with a prayer to quash the non-bailable warrant dated 20.06.2024 issued in the Special Case No.126 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No.1414 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Phase III, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, POCSO Act-I, Gautam Buddh Nagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is a labour. He has no instructions from his counsel to appear in the Court. As such, he was hopeful that his counsel might have taken care of his case, which led to issuance of non-bailable warrant by the Court on 20.06.2024. It is further submitted that the accused applicant wants to appear in the Court to face trial as he was already appearing in the case, but the witnesses were not being produced by the prosecution.

¶10

Learned AGA accepts the notice for the State.

¶11

There is no point of issuing notice upon opposite party no.4.

¶12

At this juncture, learned counsel prayed that the interest of the applicant may be protected till he files the NBW recall application or bail application as the case may be.

¶13

NA528 No. 18243 of 2025

¶14

¶15

The applicant may not be arrested for 30 days from today during which period the applicant may move appropriate application before the trial court.

¶16

Request is made to the trial court to consider that the accused was being represented by a Counsel, who did not appear in the case or moved exemption application, even the vakalatnama has also not been withdrawn. Further to consider the reason for his absence on the date fixed during his release on bail and pass an order sympathetically, but successive jumping of bail is not to be ignored.

¶17

The application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. is accordingly disposed of .

¶18

(Avnish Saxena,J.)

¶19

September 4, 2025 Shivangi

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANGI YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Javed Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed Khan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases