Onkar Nath vs State Of U.P. & Anr.
2017 Latest Caselaw 1176 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 15
 

 
Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. - 3373 of 2017
 

 
Applicant :- Onkar Nath
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Anr.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Modanwal
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

No case is made out for interfering with the order of summoning Court. The accused was summoned vide order dated 17.8.2016 and he did not appear nor he obtained any stay what would a Judge do for four months if an accused does not appear before him.

It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that there is a civil litigation going on all these fact could have been looked by learned Judge, if once applicant had applied for discharge or had applied before Trial Court after accepting the jurisdiction of Court but he neither appeared nor took any recourse of law accept that he reconveniently has now come after non bailable warrant dated 7th April, 2017. It is not known as to why the Police Authorities have yet not  acted on the non bailable warrants were issued by Court below.

However, looking to the age of applicant, non bailable warrant as he still not served is stayed.

Further Order

After the aforesaid order is passed, learned counsel for applicant states that he does not know whether non bailable warrant was issued or not.

Investigating Officer, Pratapgarh shall personally  remain present before this Court tomorrow i.e. 25th May, 2017 with an affidavit that what steps were taken till date and to explain as to why non-bailable warrant dated 7th April, 2017 has still not been effected, despite there being no stay.

Petitioner to file his own affidavit as his Counsel states that he did not know that non bailable warrant was issued. However, in the petition, there is an averment that the non bailable warrant as issued on 7th April, 2017 be stayed.

Put up tomorrow i.e. 25th May, 2017.

Order Date :- 24.5.2017

Mukesh