Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 20669 (ALL)

ASHLAM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/5420/2025 · 2025-02-19

Vinod Diwakar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:24745 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 5420 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashlam And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed for quashing the Non Bailable Warrant dated 06.04.2024, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/POCSO Act, Room No.14, Saharanpur in Session Trial No.603 of 2013, titled State v. Mahmood and others, arising out of Case Crime No.25 of 2011, under Section 147, 148, 149, 307, 336, 353, 392, 504, 506, 427 IPC and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act and Section 4/21 of the Mines and Minerals Act, P.S. Mirzapur, District Saharanpur, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge-14, Saharanpur. 3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that impugned order is against the facts and law. The applicants had no knowledge about the proceedings initiated against him due to which they could not appear on the date fixed by the trial Court, hence, non-bailable warrant was issued against the applicants. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A opposed the prayer. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the matter, subject to deposit of Rs.4,000/- by the applicants in favour of District Legal Services Authority concerned, it is directed that in case the applicants appear and move appropriate application before the trial Court for recalling the impugned order, the same shall be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For a period of 15 days or till the applicants move an application before the trial Court, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. Further, the Court shall not entertain the fictitious and repetitive personal exemption application, and if filed, the same shall be dismissed with reasonable costs. 6. With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of. Order Date :- 20.2.2025 A. Tripathi Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- AKHILESH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad