Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 108086 (ALL)

VEERU v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANTHER

A482/40050/2024 · 2025-02-14

Rajeev Misra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:21617 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40050 of 2024 Applicant :- Veeru Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anther Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Virendra Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Veerua, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the instant application and quash the impugned N.B.W. order dated 09.05.2024 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi, in S.T. No.48 of 2019 (State Vs. Heeraman and others), arising out of Case Crime No.99 of 2018, Under Section 363, 370, 376(C)(iii), 344, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Lohta, District-Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Varanasi. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the impugned N.B.W. order dated 09.05.2024 passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Varanasi, in S.T. No.48 of 2019 (State Vs. Heeraman and others), arising out of Case Crime No.99 of 2018, Under Section 363, 370, 376(C)(iii), 344, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Lohta, District- Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Varanasi, otherwise the applicant will suffer an irreparable loss and hardships which cannot be compensated in any manner whatsoever. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the learned court below to release the applicant on fresh bail bond during the pendency of the trial of S.T. No.48 of 2019 (State Vs. Heeraman and others), arising out of Case Crime No.99 of 2018, Under Section 363, 370, 376(C)(iii), 344, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Lohta, District-Varanasi, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge POCSO Act, Varanasi." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that the trial of applicant pending before Court below is at the stage of Section 313 Cr.P.C. i.e. statement of accused-applicant and for disposal of application dated 09.05.2024. On the previous date i.e. 25.04.2024, applicant had filed an application seeking exemption from appearance and therefore, the Court fixed 09.05.2024 as the next date. However, again on 09.05.2024, an exemption application was filed by applicant, upon which, Court below issued non bailable warrant against applicant. As such, applicant is repeatedly avoiding appearance before Court. It is then submitted by the learned A.G.A. that non bailable warrant was issued against applicant by Court below, vide order dated 09.05.2024. However, in spite of the fact that a period of more than 8 months has rolled by, applicant has not yet appeared before Court below. On account of lackadaisical approach of accused-applicant, the hearing in trial has remained held up for more than 8 months. As such, no indulgence be granted by this Court in favour of applicant. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 7. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 8. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad