Disposed

Mohd. Hanif Alias Bhura v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2025NA528/39688/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge High Court application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. to quash a non-bailable warrant. The court directed the applicant to surrender and apply for bail within thirty days, during which no coercive action would be taken.

What did the court decide?

No coercive action against the applicant for a period of thirty days, provided he surrenders and applies for bail.

Mohd. Hanif Alias Bhura Vs State of… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 39688 of 2025

¶3

Mohd. Hanif Alias Bhura

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of U.P. and Another

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Manoj Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 78

¶10

HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶12

This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 21.4.2025 passed by Special Judge, N.D.P.S. Act / Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.12, Saharanpur in Special Case No.102 of 2016 (State Vs. Mohd. Hanif @ Bhura) arising out of case crime no.323 of 2016 under section 18/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Gangoh, Distt. Saharanpur whereby the learned trial court has issued nonbailable warrant against the applicant.

¶13

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that earlier in this case the applicant was released on bail but however for some unavoidable circumstances he could not reach the court, as a result of which non-bailable warrant dated 21.4.2025 was issued against him.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and it has been submitted that it was a deliberate negligence on the part of the applicant and he deliberately did not appear before the court even after having knowledge of the case pending in the court. Applicant is an absconder and that is why punitive process has been issued against him.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant has made a submission before the Court that the applicant is ready and willing to appear before the trial court to cooperate with the trial.

¶16

From the perusal of the record, it appears that the applicant is not a

¶17

NA528 No. 39688 of 2025

¶18

¶19

chronic absconder.

¶20

In the factual scenario of this case, the applicant is directed to appear before the trial court in pursuance of the order issuing non-bailable warrant against him by the trial court and in case the applicant surrenders before the trial court and applies for bail within thirty days from today, the same shall be considered and decided by the Court concerned expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of thirty days from today, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant.

¶21

It is made clear that no further time shall be allowed to the applicant to surrender and apply for bail before the Court concerned and if he does not appear before the trial court within the aforesaid period, the law shall take its own course and the order passed today will be of no help to the applicant.

¶22

With the above observations, the application stands disposed of.

¶23

October 28, 2025 ss

¶24

(Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.)

¶25

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

Mohd. Hanif Alias Bhura v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Hanif Alias Bhura v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases