Babu Ram @ Babu Ram Chauhan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. ...
2026 Latest Caselaw 693 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Babu Ram @ Babu Ram Chauhan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... on 2 April, 2026

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:23337
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2731 of 2026   
 
   Babu Ram @ Babu Ram Chauhan    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Akhand Pratap Pandey, Rohit Upadhyay   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 16
 
   
 
 HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.      

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A.for the State and perused the records.

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated-13.06.2025 by means of which non-bailable warrant issued by Additional District & Session Judge-1, Ambedkar Nagar as well as quash the impugned order. dated-11.03.2026 the proceeding under section-82 Cr.P.C. which was issued by Additional District & Session Judge-1, Ambedkar Nagar arising out of the Chargesheet No. 01 of 2023 dated 27.12.2023 arising out First Information Report 629 of 2023 related with Police Station Akbarpur, District-Ambedkar Nagar, as contained in Annexure No. 1 and 2 to this petition, so far it related to the petitioner.

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant after being released on bail, went away outside of the city and on 13-06-2025, the non bailable warrant was issued and subsequently thereof, the proceeding under section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has also been instituted. He added that the applicant is innocent and due to some misconception in between the counsel for the applicant and the applicant, he could not know regarding the date fixed by the court, thus, he did not appear and the coercive proceeding has been instituted against him for procuring his presence. He next added that the applicant is a law abiding citizen and he never violated the law and he is a poor person and is still ready to appear before the trial court and cooperate with the trial proceedings. Therefore, submission is that the coercive proceedings, instituted against the applicant, may be quashed.

Learned counsel appearing for the State has opposed the contentions aforesaid.

Upon considering the submissions of learned counsels for the parties and after perusal of records, it is apparent that the criminal proceeding against the applicant is instituted in the year 2022 and as per the statement of learned counsel for the applicant, the applicant was outside of the city and due to certain misconception with respect to the date in between the applicant and his counsel, he could not appear before the trial court.

This court finds that the non bailable warrant as well as the proclamation under section 82 of the Cr.P.C., are issued, to procure the presence of an accused before the court so as the trial could be concluded within time.

It is apparent that the applicant is a poor person and he was out of the city and he undertakes that he will appear before the trial court and further he will never escape or avoid the proceedings of the court. In this peculiar circumstances, the orders impugned dated 13-06-2025, 11-03-2026 & 27-12-2023 are hereby kept in abeyance.

The applicant is directed to appear before the trial court on the next date fixed, failing which the trial court would be at liberty to proceed against the applicant, in accordance with law.

The application is disposed of accordingly.

(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)

April 2, 2026

AKS