Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:22739 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42028 of 2024 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- J.B. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. J.B. Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Applicant-Manoj Kumar Pandey, 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 this application Quash the impugned Non Bailable warrant dated 17.08.2016 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar in Case No. 636 of 2014 (State Vs. Manon Kumar Pandey) arising out of Case Crime No. 111 of 2013, U nder Section - 376/323/504/420 IPC, Police Stationo-Sector-39 NOIDA, District-Gautam Budh Nagar against the applicant. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the further proceedings of Case No. 636 of 2014 (State Vs. Manon Kumar Pandey) arising out of Case Crime No. 111 of 2013, U nder Section - 376/323/504/420 IPC, Police Stationo-Sector-39 NOIDA, District-Gautam Budh Nagar against the applicant pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar during the pendency of present application. And/or may pass such other and further order/orders which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case. Otherwise applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that an FIR dated 08.02.2013 was lodged by first informant-opposite party-2 Madhuri and was registered as Case Crime No. 111 of 2013, under Sections 376, 323, 504, 420 IPC, Police Station-Sector-39, NOIDA, District-Gautam Budha Nagar. 5. After completion of statutory investigation of aforementioned case crime number, Investigating Officer submitted the charge sheet/police report dated 29.07.2013, whereby accused-applicant Manoj Kumar Pandey was charge sheeted under Sections 376, 323, 504, 420 IPC. 6. Upon submission of aforementioned charge sheet, cognizance was taken upon same by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budha Nagar, vide Cognizance Taking Order dated 04.01.2014. Simultaneously, summons were issued to applicant. Applicant has already been enlarged on bail, vide order dated 16.07.2013. Since 14.01.2014, applicant has not yet appeared before Court below. Thereafter, bailable warrant was issued against applicant, vide order dated 23.05.2016 followed by orders dated 24.06.2016 and 26.07.2016. Ultimately, non bailable warrant was issued against accused-applicant, vide order dated 17.08.2016. 7. Learned A.G.A. thus submits that there is no pleading in the entire affidavit filed in support of aforementioned application with regard to the execution of bailable warrant issued against applicant. Apart from above, non bailable warrant was issued against applicant, vide order dated 17.08.2016. However, in spite of the fact that a period of more than 8 years and 5 months have rolled by, applicant has not yet appeared before Court below. As such, the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case have remained held up for aforementioned period on account of non co- operation of applicant. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. 8. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 9. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the preliminary 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 at this stage. In view of above, this Court does not find any good ground to entertain the present application. 10. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 11. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Vinay Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad