RAHUL KUMAR SINGH @ DEEPAK KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NA528/9068/2025 · 2025-03-20
Sanjay Kumar Pachori
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30702 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 30702 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41927 Court No. - 72 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9068 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Singh @ Deepak Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra,Sanjay Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J. Sri Sanjay Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 96 of 2021 (State vs. Rahul Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 762 of 2019, under Sections 307, 504, 506 of I.P.C., P.S. Deoband, District Saharanpur, as well as order dated 8.10.2024 whereby non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that impugned order has been passed without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and position of law. It is further submitted that applicant has been granted anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 41433 of 2019 vide order dated
1.10.2019. It is further submitted that impugned order has been passed by the court without satisfying itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served and without issuing any summon or bailable warrant, direct N.B.W. has been issued.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and law provided in this regard. It is further submitted that order of the non-bailable warrant has been passed without satisfying the service of summons or bailable warrants itself and reason to believe from absconding the process of the court. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party
No. 2 have opposed the application. Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is finally disposed of with a direction that in case applicant appears before the court below within three weeks from today and applies for bail/recall of non bailable warrant/furnish bail bonds in compliance of earlier order of this Court, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941. For a period of three weeks from today or till applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.
Order Date :- 21.3.2025 A.P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANAND PRAKASH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad