Mohammad Taiyab @ Mohd. Tayyab vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Since, factual position of the above captioned applications are identical, with the consent of the parties, they are being heard and decided together at admission stage.

¶23

A482 No. 3953 of 2026

¶24

2

¶25

In view of order proposed to be passed, notice to opposite party no.2 is dispensed with in all applications.

¶26

APPLICATION U/S 482 No.3953 of 2026 has been filed by the applicant, under Section 482 CrPC, seeking following main relief:-

¶27

"to set aside and quash the order dated 07/03/2026 AND 28/04/2026 as passed by the Learned Court of Additional Court No.-4, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.- 42843 of 2024 thereby allowing the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/opposite party no.-2 and also quashing the non-Bailable Warrant issued against the petitioner, in the interest of justice."

¶28

APPLICATION U/S 482 No.3959 of 2026 has been filed by the applicant, under Section 482 CrPC, seeking following main relief:-

¶29

"to set aside and quash the order dated 07/03/2026 AND 28/04/2026 as passed by the Learned Court of Additional Court No.-4, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.- 43214 of 2024 thereby allowing the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/opposite party no.-2 and also quashing the non-Bailable Warrant issued against the petitioner, in the interest of justice."

¶30

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. 1873 of 2026 has been filed by the applicant, under Section 528 BNSS, seeking following main relief:-

¶31

"to set aside and quash the order dated 07/03/2026 AND 28/04/2026 as passed by the Learned Court of Additional Court No.-4, Lucknow in Complaint Case No.- 37437 of 2024 thereby allowing the petitioner to cross-examine the complainant/opposite party no.-2 and also quashing the non-Bailable Warrant issued against the petitioner, in the interest of justice."

¶32

For sake of brevity, facts of the case, as narrated in APPLICATION U/S 482 No.3953 of 2026, have been considered, which are as follows:

¶33

A complaint, under Section 138 read with Section 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short "NI Act") was filed by the complainant/opposite party no.2 against the applicant on

¶34

A482 No. 3953 of 2026

¶35

3

¶36

09.04.2024, registered as Complaint Case No. 42843 of 2024. The Trial Court issued the summoning order dated 25.09.2024. The complainant filed an Application U/s 483 CrPC No.658 of 2025 before this Court seeking expeditious disposal of the case which was disposed of on 22.08.2025 by which direction was issued to the Trial Court to consider and decide the complaint case expeditiously. The case was put for crossexamination of the complainant on 24.09.2025, however, the matter was adjourned for 08.10.2025, then again for 04.11.2025. On 11.11.2025, the Trial Court closed the opportunity for cross-examination. The order dated 11.11.2025 whereby the opportunity for cross-examination was closed was recalled, vide order dated 18.11.2025 and it was observed that there is a possibility of compromise between the parties. The same was again observed by the Trial Court on 25.11.2025, 29.11.2025 and 09.12.2025. The case was put for crossexamination of the complainant on 07.02.2026, however, the matter was adjourned for 11.02.2026 and again for 21.02.2026. The opportunity to cross examine the complainant was closed for the applicant, vide order dated 07.03.2026, which has been impugned herein. The Trial Court passed Non-Bailable Warrant against the applicant, vide order dated 28.04.2026 but no Bailable Warrant was issued prior to the same, which has also been impugned herein.

¶37

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that one opportunity be allowed to the applicant to cross-examine PW-1 and the applicant will not seek any adjournment in future.

¶38

It has been informed that the case is fixed for 29.05.2026 and the case may be preponed before the Trial Court and the applicant is ready for cooperation in disposal of the complaint cases.

¶39

Shri Balbir, learned AGA-I for opposite party no.1 has pointed out that this Court has passed an order on 22.08.2025 in Application U/s 483 CrPC No.658 of 2025 and direction has been issued to decide the case expeditiously. But the order sheet indicates that the applicant is not

¶40

A482 No. 3953 of 2026

¶41

4

¶42

cooperating before the Trial Court, therefore, the applications are liable to be dismissed.

¶43

He has further submitted that impugned order was passed on dated 07.03.2026 by which opportunity to cross-examine was closed but the applicant did not approach this Court immediately but has approached after issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants and the case is now fixed for statement under Section 313 CrPC.

¶44

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for opposite party no.1 in all the applications.

¶45

Be that as it may, the record reveals that cross-examination of PW-1 has not been done, therefore, in the interest of justice, I allow the applicant to cross-examine PW-1 in all three applications on the cost of Rs.60,000/- for all the three cases, for one day. The Trial Court is directed to prepone the case fixing the same on 20.05.2026. The applicant will appear before the Trial Court along with certified copy of this order on 14.05.2026 on which date the Trial Court shall fix the case for 20.05.2026 and on that date, he will allow the applicant to cross-examine PW-1 in one day. The the Trial Court is directed to inform the parties to appear before him for cross-examination which will be concluded on 20.05.2026 itself.

¶46

The applicant will hand over the bank draft of Rs.60,000/- to opposite party no.2/complainant on 20.05.2026 before the Trial Court.

¶47

It is also made clear that the applicant will not seek adjournment before the Trial Court and the Trial Court will adhere to the directions issued by this Court, vide order dated 22.08.2025 passed in Application U/s 483 CrPC No.658 of 2025 and will proceed on day to day basis. Non-Bailable Warrants shall remain stayed subject to compliance of directions issued by this Court.

¶48

In case of default, benefit of this order will not be available to the applicant.

¶49

With the aforesaid directions/observations, the applications are

¶50

A482 No. 3953 of 2026

¶51

5

¶52

disposed of.

¶53

Office to issue certified copy of this order to the applicant today itself on the payment of usual charges.

¶54

(Brij Raj Singh,J.)

¶55

May 12, 2026

¶56

Mohit Singh/-

¶57

Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Taiyab @ Mohd. Tayyab v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Taiyab @ Mohd. Tayyab v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Shivangi Bharti vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Navin Kumar Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Shatrughan Upadhyay vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Deep Chand and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Sayem Yazdani @ Sayam Yazdani vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Shatrughan Kumar vs Narcotics Control Bureau Thru. Its Regional Office Lko.