Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91120 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 11656 of 2025 Applicant :- Deepak And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. Heard Sri Rakesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA-I for the State and perused the record. The present application has been filed by the applicants praying to quash the non-bailable warrant dated 07.06.2024, summoning order dated 10.05.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act/ Additional District and Sessions Judge, Lalitpur in Complaint No. 253 of 2018, Smt. Jaykunwar v. Deepak Patel and another, under Sections 452, 354-B, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act, 1989 against applicant no. 1 and under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)Da, Dha of SC/ST Act against applicant no. 2, Police Station Lalitpur. At the very outset, on the basis of instructions, learned A.G.A. submits that summons have been served upon the applicants way back in the year 2019 and nothing has been shown by the applicants that they are not avoiding to face trial. On being confronted with the aforesaid objection, learned counsel for the applicants could not reply satisfactorily, however, he confines his prayer as sought for in the present application and request for issuance of a direction to the concerned court below to consider and decide the bail application/surrender application of the applicants expeditiously. The record reflects that the applicants have deliberately avoided the process of law, therefore, they cannot be entitled to any relief from this Court in exercise of extraordinary powers under Section 528 B.N.S.S. They have failed to substantiate before this Court in view of the reasoning stated hereinabove that due to personal difficulty 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 they are fleeing from the process of law without any reasonable cause. "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 bail, 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. In view of the aforesaid, this application is being disposed of providing that if the applicants appear and surrender before the concerned court below within four weeks from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail may be considered and decided expeditiously in accordance with law. For the period of four weeks from today or till the disposal of bail application, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, they do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action may be taken against them. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 DS Digitally signed by :- DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad