Bombay High Court
Ali Hussain Mohd. Hussain vs The State Of Maharashtra on 14 June, 2021
Bench: A.S. Gadkari
Osk 5-APL-466-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (A.P.L.) NO. 466 OF 2021
Ali Hussain Mohd. Hussain ... Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent
Mr.Kalim Ansari i/b. Mr.Jagdish Shukla for Applicant.
Mr.A.R. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
CORAM : A.S. GADKARI, J.
DATE : 14th June 2021.
(Through Video Conferencing)
P.C. :
By the present application filed under Section 482 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), the Applicant-Original Accused has prayed that,
the Order of issuance of non bailable warrant in R.C.C. No. 1130 of 2019 by
the learned 4th Jt. C.J.J.D. & J.M.F.C., Nashik, dated 26 th February 2021,
against the Applicant may be quashed and during the pendency of the present
application, it may be stayed.
2. Record indicates that, Criminal Revision No. 33 of 2021 preferred
by the Applicant against the Order dated 26 th February 2021 has been
dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-8, Nashik, by its Judgment
and Order dated 5th March 2021, as not maintainable in view of bar of Section
Osk 5-APL-466-2021.odt
397(2) of Cr.P.C..
3. Mr.Ansari, learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that, the
Trial Court had fixed the date for recording of evidence in R.C.C. No. 1130 of
2019 on 26th February 2021, however as the wife of the Applicant has
delivered a premature baby on 23 rd February 2021 at Delhi, his presence for
taking her care was necessary. Applicant had therefore informed the same and
forwarded relevant medical documents to his Advocate through e-mail, who is
attending his case in the Court at Nashik. He submitted that, there was a
genuine reason for the Applicant for not remaining present on 26 th February
2021 and therefore, the learned Trial Court ought not have issued non
bailable warrant against the Applicant. He further submitted that, the
applicant is ordinary resident of New Delhi and after coming to his knowledge
about issuance of non bailable warrant, he immediately could not come down
to Nashik to file an application for cancellation of bail, as the applicant was
diagnosed with COVID-19 positive. Mr.Ansari drew my attention at page
No.77 of the present application i.e. report issued by EPRO-MED Diagnostic
Private Limited, in support of his contention.
Mr.Ansari on instructions further submitted that, on or before 30 th
June 2021 the Applicant will remain present before the Trial Court and will
file an application for cancellation of non bailable warrant issued by it. The
said statement is accepted as an undertaking given to this Court.
Osk 5-APL-466-2021.odt
4. Mr.Patil, learned A.P.P. has no serious objection for the statement
made by the learned counsel for the Applicant and submitted that, necessary
Orders in the interest of justice may be passed.
5. In view of the above, the Applicant is permitted to appear before
the learned 4th Jt. C.J.J.D. & J.M.F.C., Nashik, District Nashik, on or before
11.00 am of 30th June 2021 and to file an application for cancellation of non
bailable warrant issued by the said Court.
6. Till the Applicant appears before the Trial Court and files an
application for cancellation of non bailable warrant the impugned Order dated
26th February 2021 passed by the learned Trial Court thereby issuing non
bailable warrant against the Applicant is kept in abeyance.
7. It is made clear that, if the Applicant fails to appear before the
learned Magistrate on or before 11.00 am of 30 th June 2021, the ad-interim
relief granted by this Court shall come to an end automatically and the
impugned Order dated 26th February 2021 will come in operation.
8. Stand over to 2nd July 2021.
To be placed under the caption of "Directions".
[A.S. GADKARI, J.]
