Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91509 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 6188 of 2025 Applicant :- Beerbal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indrapal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Mr. Indrapal, learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. The instant application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 09.09.2021 as well as summoning order dated 02.08.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.1356 of 2022, (State Vs. Beerbal and Others), arising out of Case Crime No.98 of 2021, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Majhgawan, District-Hamirpur, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Rath, Hamirpur. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. submits that charge sheet is of the year 2021 and applicants have been summoned in the year 2022. He further submits that there is nothing on record to show that applicants are not avoiding facing trial. The applicants have failed to substantiate before this Court that as to why they could not appear before the Court concerned. The proceedings of the court concerned have been held up on account of non appearance of the applicants and as such the applicants are fleeing from the process of law without any reasonable cause. Thus, the present application is liable to the dismissed. "Fleeing from justice" refers to the act of accused in evading or avoiding arrest, prosecution, or punishment for a crime. An accused in aforesaid act tries to avoid facing criminal prosecution by often avoiding summons, warrants and other process issued by the court. An accused is legally bound to comply with the summons issued by the court of law except where the process is challenged before the higher forum by the accused. Any person who has been issued process by court of law cannot be permitted to evade the same thereby not permitting the court of law to proceed in the administration of justice. The said act of accused in avoiding the process of court of law without any justification effects the very cause of justice. An accused fleeing from justice without reasonable cause has the effect of stopping/slowing the criminal process of law which effects the cause of speedy justice to the victim or society at large. Non appearance of an accused before the court concerned when the summons has been served (without reasonable explanation for non-appearance) may be indicative of the fact that such accused do not have respect to the process of law." It is important for rule of law to prevail that the criminal trial is completed without delay. Where an accused flees from the process of law and thereby avoids appearing before the court, the very concept of speedy trial is put at peril and justice to the victim is delayed. The supreme court in Vipan Kumar Dhir v. State of Punjab, (2021) 15 SCC 518 has observed that while granting relief, the possibility of the accused to influence prosecution witnesses, fleeing from justice or creating other impediments in the fair investigation, ought not to be overlooked. While considering the question of whether an accused is fleeing from justice, the conduct of the accused in respect of the process of law is required to be considered. In criminal prosecution when the court find material against the accused sufficient for prosecution, the court issues summons or warrants for appearance to the accused for participation in the trial. When the summons or warrants are served on the accused in accordance with law then duty is cast on the accused to appear before the court concerned except where there exists justification for non-appearance of the accused before the accused. An accused who is served with the process of court and fails to appear before the court concerned without any reasonable cause can be said to be fleeing from the process of law. When confronted with the aforesaid objection, learned counsel for the applicants gave up his challenge to the aforesaid impugned order and the entire proceedings against the applicants and confined his submission requesting to grant some protection to the applicants to surrender before the concerned court below. The learned counsel for the applicants further stated at the Bar that he is not pressing any other prayer made in this application on merits and prayed that a direction at the outset may be issued to the concerned courts below to consider and decide the bail application of the applicants expeditiously. Learned A.G.A. for the State submits that in case the applicant are not pressing the relief as sought for by them on merits and want to surrender before the concerned court below, he has no objection in granting protection to them for a short period. In view of above, considering the aforesaid alternative prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that the applicants shall surrender before the concerned court below within three weeks from today and in case apply for bail, the bail application of the applicants shall be disposed of expeditiously by the courts below in accordance with law, after hearing the informant, keeping in view the guidelines as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, reported in (2021) 10 SCC 773. For the period of three weeks from today or till the time of surrender of the applicants before the concerned court below, whichever is earlier, applicants shall not be arrested in the above case. With the above observations and directions, this application u/s 528 B.N.S.S. is disposed of. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad