Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105490 Court No. - 82 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 23251 of 2025 Applicant :- Vanshi Dhar Chaturvedi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Heard Sri Santosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vijay Kumar, learned AGA-I, for the State. 2. The instant application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to set aside the non-bailable warrant dated 9.6.2025 as well as proceedings under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. issued against him in S.T.No.15/2004 (arising out of Case Crime No.113/1996), under Section 409 IPC and Sections 13(1)C and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act (State of U.P. Vs. Vanshi Dhar Chaturvedi), Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh pending in the court of Special Judge, P.C.-5, Gorakhpur and to stay the said proceedings during pendency of the application. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is a retired person and criminal trial relating to offences under Section 409 IPC and Sections 13(1)C and 13(2) Prevention of Corruption Act is pending against him and when he could not appear before the court concerned then warrants were issued against him and thereafter processes under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. have also been issued against him. 4. He further submits that applicant is not an absconder and under compelling circumstances he could not appear before the court concerned. 5. He further submits that applicant is ready to appear before the trial court within 15 days and till that he may be protected. 6. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that there is no illegality in passing the impugned order. 7. Learned AGA further submits that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 1996 and charge sheet against applicant was filed in the year 2004 but applicant never appeared before the trial court in spite of service of notice and he tried to avoid the court proceedings and, therefore, no option was left before the court concerned except to issue warrants and initiate the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. against him, therefore, instant application is devoid of merit and it should be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. From the record it reflects that FIR of the present case was lodged in the year 1996 and thereafter charge sheet was filed in the year 2004 and till today applicant did not appear before the court concerned and, therefore, it reflects that deliberately applicant is avoiding the court proceedings and after perusing entire material available on record and impugned order I did not find any illegality in impugned order, therefore, instant application is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 10. Accordingly the instant application filed by applicant stands dismissed. 11. Considering the fact that trial of the case is pending for the last two decades, applicant is directed to appear before the trial court within two weeks. It is further directed that if applicant applies for bail before the court concerned then his bail application should be decided expeditiously in accordance with law. Order Date :- 7.7.2025 SKM Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad