Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 2168 (ALL)

Satendra @ Bittoo v. State of U. P.

2015-07-29

VIVEK KUMAR BIRLA

body2015
JUDGMENT Vivek Kumar Birla, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed for quashing the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicants in S.S.T. No. 172 of 2010 under Section 18/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Refinery, District Mathura. 3. The contention of the counsel for the applicant is that no offence against the applicant is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with mala fide intention for the purposes of harassment. Learned counsel for the applicant has made a statement at the Bar that the applicant shall appear within 30 days from today along with proper application, thus, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may be stayed. 4. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed questions of fact, which cannot be adjudicated upon by this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. At this stage only a prima facie case is to be seen. 5. The prayer for quashing the non-bailable warrant issued against the applicant is refused. 6. However, it is provided that if the applicant surrenders before the court below within 30 days from today with an application for recall of the order of NBW, his application shall be considered and disposed off, if possible, on the same day. Till such time that the application is disposed off, no coercive action be taken against the applicant in pursuance of the orders issuing NBW. However, in case, the applicant does not appear before the Court below within 30 days from today, coercive action shall be taken against him for ensuring his presence. With the aforesaid directions, this application is disposed off.