Kaushal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:46124

Court No. - 70

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9606 of 2025

Applicant :- Kaushal Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gagan Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Nipendra Pratap Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Gagan Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned AGA for State-opposite party-1.

¶7

Perused the record.

¶8

Applicant- Kaushal Yadav who is a charge-sheeted accused and is facing trial before court below has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 528 BNSS with the following prayer:

¶9

"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire criminal proceeding of Session Trial No. 317 of 2013 (State Vs. Rahul Upadhyay and others) as well as impugned Non Bailable warrant dated 30.01.2025 passed by Learned Additional District Judge (F.T.C.) Agra in case crime no. 72 of 2013 under section 376, 354, 120-B I.P.C. police station Tajganj, District Agra.

¶10

It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of Session Trial No. 317 of 2013 (State Vs. Rahul Upadhyay and others) as well as impugned NonBailable warrant dated 30.01.2025 in case crime no. 72 of 2013 under section 376. 354, 120-B IP.C. police station Tajganj, District Agra. Pending in the court of Learned Additional District Judge (F.T.C.) Agra. During the pendency of the case before this Hon'ble Court.

¶11

And/or pass such other and further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case."

¶12

Learned counsel for applicant submits that applicant has been participating in the proceedings of the concerned criminal case regularly. Unfortunately on 30.01.2025, there was a short delay on the part of applicant in filing the exemption application. Consequently, Non-Bailable Warrant has been issued by court

¶13

below against applicant. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that the order impugned is liable to be recalled.

¶14

Per contra, the learned AGA has opposed the present application. He contends that exemption application was filed by accused-applicant before court below on 30.01.2025 after warrant was already issued against applicant by court below. He therefore contends that since applicant himself was not diligent in pursuing his case, no illegality can be attached to the order impugned. He therefore submits that this application is liable to be dismissed.

¶15

Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for State-opposite party-1 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that no useful purpose shall be served in keeping this application pending.

¶16

Accordingly, this application is disposed of finally with direction to applicant to approach the court below and file a recall application seeking recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant issued against the applicant. In case such a recall application is filed by applicant before court below within a period of two weeks from today, court below shall sympathetically consider the same. For a period of two weeks from today, the execution of Non-Bailable Warrant issued by the court below against applicant shall remain in abeyance.

¶17

With the aforesaid direction, this application stands finally disposed of .

¶18

Order Date :- 2.4.2025 R.S. Tiwari

¶19

Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR TIWARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kaushal Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal Yadav v. State of U.P. and Another

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