AYUBKHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
A482/6012/2025 · 2025-07-25
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153115 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153115 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:42894 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6012 of 2025 Applicant :- Ayubkhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Misra, the learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Hans Raj Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicants have sought quashing of the entire proceedings and charge-sheet arising out of Case No.3086 of 2018 pending in the court of Addl. CJM, Court No.5, Hardoi arising out of Case Crime No.25/2003 under SEctions 467/468/471/420/201/120-B IPC relating to P.S.- Shahbad, District- Hardoi.
3. The learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the aforesaid case was lodged in the year 2003. The applicant has been released on bail and although he has been participating in the proceedings before the trial Court, the proceedings are not progressing any further as the other co-accused has approached this court by filing application u/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.2171 of 2012 wherein an interim order has been passed directing that no coercive measures shall be taken against co-accused persons. Therefore, the co-accused persons are not participating in the proceedings of trial and the trial is not proceeding. Meanwhile, the age of the applicant is advancing and he is now aged about 71 years. Although the applicant has been participating in trial, for some reason, he could not appear on one date and the trial court has issued non-bailable warrant against him.
4. This Court finds that when the applicant has already put in appearance before the trial court, it would be more appropriate for him to file an application seeking a discharge, after getting the non-bailable warrant issued against him recalled. In case such an application is moved, the trial Court shall proceed to decide the application expeditiously in accordance with law.
5. Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 25.7.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench