Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2091 (ALL)

Saktu @ Sapdu v. State of U. P.

2015-07-24

RAMESH SINHA

body2015
JUDGMENT Ramesh Sinha, J. Heard Sri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel the applicants and Sri Nitin Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record 2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 18.5.2015 passed by Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Saharanpur in Criminal Case No. 2480 of 2014 arising out of Case Crime No. 30 of 2006 under Sections 332, 353, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Mirzapur, District Saharanpur by which non bailable warrant has been issued against the applicants. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants have already been granted bail by the competent court and thereafter they could not appear before the trial court, hence non-bailalbe warrants were issued against them. He further submits that the reasons on account of which the applicants failed to appear before the trial court were beyond their control and the applicants have every intention to appear before the court concerned and participate in the proceedings of the trial. 4. After having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and perused the impugned order as well as the other materials brought on record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I dispose of this application with a direction that in case the applicants moves an application for cancelling the non-bailable warrants issued against them before the court below within three weeks from today along with the certified copy of this order, in that case the concerned court will be at its discretion to pass appropriate order thereon either recalling the non bailable warrant issued against the applicants or directing the applicants to file fresh bail bonds in the aforesaid case as the case may be within a further period of one week thereafter. 5. For a period of four weeks from today, non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants shall be kept in abeyance. 6. In the event of failure, as directed above, the Court below shall be free to take all coercive action against the applicants for ensuring their appearance before it.