Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117178 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD (Sl. No.14) Court No. - 78 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38070 of 2024 Applicant :- Gyanendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Gaur,Ankit Shukla,Mohd. Rashid Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Chandra Agrahari Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J. 1. Heard Sri Vibhu Rai, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ankit Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Chandra Agrahari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Satyendra Tiwari, learned AGA for the State. 2. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing of the orders dated 12.08.2024, 18.05.2024 and 27.07.2023 as well as the entire proceeding of Case No. 3233 of 2018 (Renu Saxena vs. Gyanendra Gupta and another), under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 376 IPC, P.S. Naubasta, District Kanpur Nagar and a direction to the trial court concerned to pass appropriate order in pursuance of the direction issued by the Revisional Court in Criminal Revision No. 246 of 2023 vide order dated 02.09.2023. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that against the summoning order dated 13.11.2018, the applicant herein had earlier filed an Application under Section 482 No. 39547 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 11.11.2019 and the Coordinate Bench of this Court had declined to interfere with the summoning order. However, the liberty was granted to the applicant to appear before the court concerned within a period of six weeks from the date of order and move an application for bail/discharge. For a period of six weeks from the date of order, it was provided that no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that he had filed the discharge application pursuant to the aforesaid order, though the applicant had filed the discharge application but he never appeared as was directed by this Court and the protection was granted only for appearance of the applicant before the learned Magistrate. The said discharge application was rejected by the Metropolitan Magistrate-I, Kanpur Nagar vide order dated 27.07.2023 holding therein that since it is only a committal court and it cannot decide the discharge application filed by the applicant. Against the said order dated 27.07.2023, a criminal revision was filed by the applicant, which was disposed of with a liberty to the applicant to press his discharge application before the sessions court if the committal court commit the case for trial before the sessions court. It was further directed by the revisional court to the committal court to commit the case before the learned sessions court after compliance of the provisions under Sections 208 and 209 Cr.P.C. as early as possible. The pre requisite for compliance of the provisions of Section 208 and 209 Cr.P.C. is the appearance of an accused person before the committal court. However, in pursuance of the revisional court's order dated 09.02.2024, the applicant never appeared before the Magistrate concerned, though an application was filed seeking committal of the case. Since,due to non-appearance of the applicant before the court, the provisions of Sections 208 and 209 Cr.P.C. could not be complied with. Therefore, vide impugned order dated 12.09.2024, the learned Magistrate refused the prayer for committal of case and issued non-bailable warrants against the applicant. Against which the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed. 5. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that vide order dated 11.11.2019 since he was directed to file the discharge application, he was not required to appear before the learned Magistrate. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 11.11.2019 reads as under: "However, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, it is provided that in case the applicant appears before the court concerned within six weeks from today and moves application for bail/discharge, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the court concerned in accordance with law after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. For a period of six weeks from today or till disposal of the aforesaid application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant." 6. From perusal of the said order, it is apparent that the first thing, which was directed by this Court was that the applicant shall appear before the court and then he was permitted to apply for bail/discharge within a period of six weeks. Though, an application for bail/discharge was filed, the applicant failed to appear before the court, therefore, the protection granted to the applicant is not available to him. 7. In view of the aforesaid, this Court do not find any illegality in the order passed by the court below. 8. Accordingly, the instant application is devoid of merit and is accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Ashish Pd. (Anish Kumar Gupta,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHISH PRASAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad