Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73717 (ALL)

GOVIND v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/24396/2025 · 2025-09-15

Kshitij Shailendra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24396 of 2025 Court No. - 92 HON'BLE KSHITIJ SHAILENDRA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. This application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed challenging the order dated 25.04.2024 passed by the learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Case No.2700826 of 2019 (State vs. Govind), arising out of Case Crime No.436 of 2019, under Sections 294, 507 IPC, Police Station-Sikandara, District-Agra. 3. Submission is that without following procedure of law directly N.B.W. has been issued and applicants have already been granted bail earlier. 4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer and submission is that in view of remedies available under Cr.P.C., this application is not maintainable. 5. Chapter VI of Cr.P.C. contains provisions of process to compel appearance of the parties. Initial provisions are for issuance of summons and then provisions for issuance of warrants are there. Apparently, when the summons are not complied with, warrants are issued. There may be circumstances apparent on the face of record that step-by-step procedure under Chapter VI has not been followed, nevertheless, Section 70 Cr.P.C. contemplates that every warrant of arrest issued by a court shall remain in force until it is cancelled by the court which issued it or until it is executed. 6. In view of the fact that there being limited power possessed with the Magistrate/Sessions Court under the Cr.P.C. to recall the process issued Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mukul Yadav, Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Govind .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) or order passed, one of such powers being existent in relation to warrants as per Section 70(2) Cr.P.C., exercise of inherent jurisdiction, which is extraordinary in nature may not be warranted for limited interference against issuance of warrants. Nevertheless, the applicant can apply before the court concerned which has issued warrants to justify non-presence on a particular date and prayer can be made in terms of Section 70 (2) Cr.P.C. 7. In view of the above, this application is disposed of in the following terms:- (i). The applicant is at liberty to file application under Section 70 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate ventilating his grievance and making appropriate prayers; (ii). In case such an application is filed within three weeks from today, the same shall be decided within a period of next one month, in accordance with law. 8. For a period of seven weeks from today, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant. September 16, 2025 Jyotsana NA528 No. 24396 of 2025 2 (Kshitij Shailendra,J.) Digitally signed by :- JYOTSANA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad