AJAY YADAV AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
NA528/34631/2025 · 2025-09-09
Saurabh Srivastava
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 94441 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 94441 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 34631 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. The present application under Section 528 BNSS, has been filed for quashing the N.B.W. order dated 17.04.2025 issued by learned Special Judge, Gangster Court, Azamgarh in G.T. No. 11 of 2010 (State vs. Ajay and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 588 of 2008, under Section 3(1) of U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submits that impugned order is against the
facts and law. The applicants have no knowledge about the proceedings initiated against them due to which he 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, applicants are
directed to appear before the learned court concerned in pursuance to impugned N.B.W. order dated 17.04.2025 within three weeks from today.
6. Till three weeks from today, no coercive action shall be initiated against the applicants in pursuance of G.T. No. 11 of 2010 (State vs. Ajay and others) arising out of Case Crime no. 588 of 2008, under Section 3(1) of Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Deepak Singh Yadav, Gauri Shankar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :
Ajay Yadav And Another .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s)
U.P. Gangster and Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986, Police Station Didarganj, District Azamgarh. After the expiry of aforesaid period of three weeks, learned concerned court is directed to proceed as per law. However, it is made clear that none of the grounds are convincing for seeking quashing of order impugned.
7. With the aforesaid observation, the application is disposed of. September 10, 2025 #Vik/- NA528 No. 34631 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- VIKRAM GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad