Pawan Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Pawan Pandey vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application not adjudicated for quashing; finally disposed with interim relief: execution of the non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for three weeks or until the applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier; on appearance and application for bail/recall of N.B.W., the court below to decide the application in the light of the specified Supreme Court judgments.

Issue for consideration

Whether the orders dated 07.05.2018 and 21.07.2025, issuing a non-bailable warrant against the applicant and initiating proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., should be quashed. +1 more

Court's answer

The application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 was finally disposed of with a direction that if the applicant appears before the court below within three weeks and applies for bail or recall of the non-bailable warrant, his application shall be decided thereon.

Ratio / Principle

Upon the applicant's appearance, his application for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the Supreme Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

Key takeaways

Execution of the non-bailable warrant against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from the date of this order, or until the applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier.ratio¶16

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.), Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 43667 of 2025 (decided November 10, 2025): Pawan Pandey sought quashing of the orders dated 07.05.2018 and 21.07.2025 issuing a non-bailable warrant against him and initiating Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings in Criminal Case No. 5032 of 2015 (arising out of Criminal Case No. 1131 of 2004, Sections 279, 304-A, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Mundha Pandey, Moradabad), pending before the ACJM, Court No. 2, Moradabad. Counsel contended the applicant was on bail when the N.B.W. issued, that the warrant issued without summons or bailable warrant having been served, and that an N.B.W. should be a last resort. Without deciding the quashing question, the Court finally disposed of the application, directing that if the applicant appears within three weeks and applies for bail/recall of the N.B.W., the application be decided in the light of Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth v. State of U.P., 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh v. C.B.I., 2021 SCC Online SC 941, and kept execution of the N.B.W. in abeyance for three weeks or until appearance, whichever is earlier.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 43667 of 2025

Pawan Pandey

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State of U.P. and Another			...	..Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ashutosh Mishra	Kumar	Mishra,	Saurabh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the order dated 07.05.2018 and 21.07.2025 whereby Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against the applicant as well as proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been initiated against the applicant in Criminal Case No. 5032 of 2015 arising out of Criminal Case No. 1131 of 2004, under Sections 279, 304-A, 427 of I.P.C., Police Station Mundha Pandey, District Moradabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2 Moradabad.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was on bail at the time of issuing of Non-Bailable Warrant. 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. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the position of law. It is settled position of law that N.B.W. should be issued as a last resort after the litigant fails to respond the notices/summons and bailable warrant. It is further submitted that non-bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summon and bailable warrant.

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

Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is

NA528 No. 43667 of 2025

2

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 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 appears before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant against applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

November 10, 2025 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad