Arjun Kumar @ Neeru Kharwar @ Arjun Kharwar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

The instant application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 19.12.2024 and 29.01.2026 (Contained in Annexure No.1 and 2 respectively) all consequential orders arising therefrom passed by the learned court concerned in Case Crime No. 0284 of 2022, arising out of Police Station Sareni, District Raebareli, whereby Non-Bailable Warrant have been issued against the applicant,

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present applicant due to unavoidable circumstances could not appear before the court and thereafter, Non Bailable Warrants were issued against the applicant on 19-12-2024 and 29-01-2026, which are also under challenge in this application.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that the applicant is using the delay-dallying tactics in the matter and as such, the applicant is not entitled for any relief.

¶14

In rejoinder, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the interest of justice would be sub-served if the present applicant is permitted to surrender before the court concerned and may file bail application and the

¶15

A482 No. 3597 of 2026

¶16

2

¶17

same may be directed to be considered within the stipulated period of time as may be fixed by this court.

¶18

Learned counsel further undertakes that the applicant will appear before the trial court within a period of two weeks and will apply for bail.

¶19

The counsel appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions abovesaid.

¶20

In view of the aforesaid submissions, the applicant is at liberty to apply bail application within 15 days from today and if such application is filed, the same shall be decided expeditiously.

¶21

For the period of fifteen days, only the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall remain stayed.

¶22

However, if the applicant does not appear before the trial court within the aforesaid period and does not cooperate with the trial proceedings, this order shall stand revoked and no benefit of this order shall accrue to him.

¶23

It is provided that since the applicant has already been bailed out as stated by the learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, no further bail bonds or sureties are required to be furnished and the applicant will be released on personal bonds.

¶24

The application is disposed of.

¶25

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

¶26

April 29, 2026 AKS

¶27

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ KRISHNA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arjun Kumar @ Neeru Kharwar @ Arjun Kharwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Kumar @ Neeru Kharwar @ Arjun Kharwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

Similar cases

Syed Minhal Abbas Abidi and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Divyanshu Yadav and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Somesh Rastogi and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vinod Singh and 11 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kamta Prasad Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mannu Ram @ Mannu Rajbhar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another