Application under Section 528 BNSS sought quashing of a non-bailable warrant issued in a sessions trial for failure to appear. The court found no ground to quash but disposed of the application directing surrender within 15 days and keeping the warrant in abeyance meanwhile.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 38849 of 2025
Bhanu Pratap
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s):Pradeep Kumar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party(s):G.A.
Court No. - 78
HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
2. This application under Section 528 of BNSS has been
filed for quashing the non-bailable warrant dated
10.9.2025 issued by Additional District and Sessions
Judge, 3rd, Bareilly Session Trial No.885 of 2024,
arising out of case crime no. 0076 of 2024, under
Sections 342, 394, 412, 420 IPC and 3/25/27 Arms Act,
P.S. Kyoladiya, District Bareilly.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the
reasons on account of which the applicant failed to
appear before the trial court were beyond his control and
the applicant has every intention to appear before the
court concerned and participate in the proceedings of the
trial. It is also submitted that on 10.9.2025 when PW-2
was present an exemption application was moved by the
applicant but his counsel did not appear before the Court
to perform cross-examination from the said witness, the
Court concerned passed the aforesaid order issuing non-
bailable warrant against the applicant.
4. Learned AGA appearing for the State opposed the
prayer.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, after perusing the impugned order as well as the
materials brought on record and having considered the
submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties,
2
NA528 No. 38849 of 2025
I do not find any good ground to quash the impugned
order. The prayer made in the application is refused.
6. However, without expressing any opinion on the merits
of the case, the application is disposed of with a
direction to the applicant to surrender before the court
below within 15 days from today and apply for bail, which
shall be considered by the Court concerned in accordance
with law. For a period of fifteen days days from today,
effect and operation of non-bailable warrant issued
against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.
7. In case of default, the Court concerned shall be at
liberty to take all coercive steps against the applicant
for ensuring his appearance. It is also observed that the
applicant will extend full cooperation to the trial court
in disposal of the trial.
8. With the aforesaid observations, the application is
disposed of.
October 14, 2025
safi
Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)
Digitally signed by :- MAHBOOB SAFI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the non-bailable warrant dated 10.9.2025 issued against the applicant for non-appearance at trial should be quashed.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Bhanu Pratap
State of U.P.
Another
Nalin Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court