Allahabad High Court
Smt Shushila Devi And 2 Others vs State Of Up And 2 Others on 20 March, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:50891 Court No. - 92 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4222 of 2024 Applicant :- Smt Shushila Devi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anita Singh,Prem Babu Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Baleshwar Chaturvedi,G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J.
1. Heard Ms. Anita Singh, appearing for the applicants, Shri Shashidhar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Baleshwar Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the Electricity Department and perused the records.
2. The instant application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing of the order dated 16.09.2022 passed by Special Judge, E.C. Act Agra, whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicants in Special Trial No. 1210 of 2015 (State Vs. Jagdish and others) arising out of case crime no. 355 of 2015, under Section 136 of the Electricity Act and Section 427 IPC, P.S. Achhanera, District Agra, pending in the court of Special Judge, E.C. Act, Agra.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that an FIR was lodged on 01.09.2015 against the applicants and other co-accused persons under Section 136 of the Electricity Act and Section 427 of the IPC, in which, it is alleged that in the mid night of 31.08.2015/01.09.2015 the applicants along with other co-accused have broken ten electricity poles and have cut down 900 meters of electric wire and taken away. After investigation, charge sheet was filed on 16.10.2015 and summons were issued against the applicants. Thereafter the applicants no.1 and 2, namely, Sushila Devi and Shiv Dutt have filed the Criminal Misc. Application No. 38899 of 2018 challenging the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1210 of 2016 (State Vs. Jagdish and others), which was disposed of vide order dated 27.10.2018. The order dated 27.10.2018 reads as follows : -
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Shravan Kumar Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Baleshwar Chaturvedi, learned counsel for O.P. No.2.
The present 482, Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1210 of 2016 (State Vs. Jagdish and others) arising out of Case Crime No.355 of 2015, under Section 136, Indian Electricity Act and Section 427, IPC, P.S. Acchnera, District Agra, pending before the Special Judge (Essential Commodities Act), Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that they have been falsely implicated by the police under the alleged sections.
In that view of the matter, they are permitted to move discharge application through counsel before the trial court and the trial court shall decide the same within a period of one month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Till the discharge application is decided, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants.
However, in case discharge application is rejected, the applicants are at liberty to appear and surrender before the courts below within three weeks thereafter and apply for bail. Their bail application shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid down by the Seven Judges' decision of this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P., reported in 2004 (57) ALR-290, as well as judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P., 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (322) (SC) after hearing the Public Prosecutor in the aforesaid crime number for the aforesaid offence.
The application stands disposed of."
4. Thereafter, applicant no. 3, namely, Gaya Prasad has also preferred Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 32222 of 2022 (Gaya Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and another), challenging the charge sheet dated 16.10.2015, which was disposed of vide order dated 15.11.2022.
5. Even after the disposal of the above applications U/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants chosen not to appear before the court concerned and accordingly non-bailable warrants have been issued against the applicants and now by means of instant application the applicants have challenged the non-bailable warrant issued against them.
6. Sri Baleshwar Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the opposite parties no.2 and 3-electricity department submits that earlier the applicants have filed two Applications U/s 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court and in both the applications, in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Sawtendra Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021), were disposed of directing the applicants to appear before the court concerned and obtain bail but the applicants have chosen not to appear before the trial court.
7. Sri Shashidhar Pandey, learned AGA appears on behalf of the State and submits that this is third application U/s 482 preferred by the applicants challenging the same proceedings, which is an abuse of the process of court and law, therefore, the present application is not maintainable for the same relief.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, it appears from the record that the applicants are avoiding their appearance before the court concerned and further they are habitual of filing applications one and the other, I am of the opinion that the impugned order has rightly been passed by the trial court whereby non-bailable warrants have been issued against the applicants and I see no illegality in the impugned order.
9. Accordingly, the instant application being devoid of any merit is dismissed.
Order Date :- 20.3.2024 Prajapati