Allowed an innocent prayer to keep a non-bailable warrant in abeyance for two weeks to enable an applicant, suffering from a paralytic attack, to surrender before the court concerned.
Two weeks time till 03.06.2014 granted to surrender; non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C-482 Petition No. 479 of 2014 Hon’ble U.C.Dhyani, J.
Mr. Ajay Veer Pundir, Advocate, present for the applicant.
Mr. V.S.Pal, learned AGA, present for the State.
An innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant is that some time may be given to the applicant to surrender before the Court concerned and in the meanwhile the non-bailable warrant issued against him may be kept in abeyance.
Learned counsel for the applicant also stated that the applicant could not before the court concerned appear because he suffered paralytic attack and now he is in a position to attend the Court. Earlier, the accused had obtained bail. He is facing trial for the offence punishable under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act.
Innocuous prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant is allowed. Two weeks’ time i.e. up to 03.06.2014 is granted to the applicant to surrender before the court concerned, whereafter, the court below will deal with the applicant according to law. During such period of two weeks, the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.
Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is thus disposed of summarily at the threshold.
(U.C.Dhyani, J.) 20.05.2014
Kaushal
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant may be given time to surrender before the concerned court pending surrender by keeping non-bailable warrant in abeyance.
H.Kaushal
The State
U.C.Dhyani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
