Allahabad High Court
Keshan Rawat And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 27 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Lavania
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40341 Court No. - 13 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4899 of 2024 Applicant :- Keshan Rawat And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Naresh Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. By means of the present application filed under section 482 Cr.P.C. duly supported by an affidavit, the applicants, namely, (i) Keshan Rawat, S/o Anoop Rawat, (ii) Rinku Rawat and (iii) Roshan Rawat, both S/o Shri Krishna @ Keshan Rawat have assailed the order dated 17.05.2024, the operative portion reads as under:
" तद्नुसार प्रार्थनापत्र निरस्त किया जाता है। उक्त प्रकरण में अभियुक्त रिन्कू रावत, केशन रावत व रोशन रावत के विरूद्ध एन०बी०डब्लू० एवं धारा-82 द०प्र०सं० की नोटिस अविलम्ब जारी किया जाता है। पत्रावली वास्ते हाजिरी दिनांक-21.06.2024 को पेश हो।"
3. Considering the settled proposition on the issue of the proceedings under section 82 Cr.P.C., requirement of issuance of notice to the opposite party no.2 is hereby dispensed with in view of the proposed order to be passed.
4. Facts of the case, which are relevant, are that after recording the statements of two witnesses, namely, P.W. 1-Amit Singh and P.W.2-Sanjay Singh, the trial court summoned the applicants in exercise of powers vested under section 319 Cr.P.C. vide order dated 30.01.2023. The operative portion of the order dated 30.01.2023 reads as under:
"अभियोजनपक्ष/वादी की तरफ से प्रस्तुत आवेदनपत्र कागज सं० 11 ख अन्तर्गत धारा 319 स्वीकार किया जाता है । अभियुक्तगण केशन रावत, रोशन रावत व रिंकू रावत के विरूद्ध आरोप अन्तर्गत धारा 364,147,302.201 भा०दं०सं० मे 'विचारण किये जाने हेतु जरिये समन तलब किया जाता है ।
अभियुक्तगण गोलू अवस्थी उर्फ शिवा, एवं सूरज उर्फ भूरा अवस्थी के विरूद्ध विरचित आरोप दिनांकित 26.03.2021 में आंशिक संशोधन करते हुए धारा 364 व 147 भा०दं०सं० के अन्तर्गत्त आरोप सं० तृतीय एवं चतुर्थ के रूप ने तय किये जाय।
पत्रावली दिनांक 06.02.2023 को वास्ते हाजिरी अभियुक्तगण केशन रावत, रोशन रावत व रिंकू रावत पेश हो । अभियुक्तगण उपरोक्त जरिये समन तलब"
5. The order dated 30.01.2023 was challenged by the applicants by filing a criminal revision, namely, Criminal Revision No.189 of 2023, Rinku Rawat and 2 others vs. State of U.P. and another and this Court after considering the material available on record admitted the revision vide order dated 28.02.2023 which reads as under:
"This criminal revision has been preferred u/s 397/401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 30.1.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Unnao in Sessions Trial No.651/2020 arising out of Case Crime No.134/2022, u/s 364, 147, 302, 201 IPC, P.S. Ajgain, District Unnao in which the revisionists summoned u/s 319 Cr.P.C. for facing trial in above Session Trial.
Heard.
Admit.
Notice on behalf of the State has already been accepted by learned A.G.A.
Issue notice to the opposite party no.2 returnable within 3 weeks.
Steps to be taken within a week.
List in the week commencing 27.3.2023.
Meanwhile, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 may file objection. "
6. From a perusal of the aforesaid order dated 28.02.2023, it appears that this Court had not protected the interest of the revisionists, applicants herein; in other wards, no interim order was passed in favour of the present applicants.
7. It appears that despite the fact that no interim order has been passed by this Court in aforesaid criminal revision, the applicants have avoided the criminal proceedings pending before the trial court and therefore, in the compelling circumstances the trial court passed the order under challenge i.e. the order 17.05.2024.
8. Impeaching the order dated 17.05.2024, Shri R. N. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that composite order regarding issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant and proceeding under section 82 Cr.P.C. could not have been passed by the trial court. It is stated that before proceeding in terms of section 82 Cr.P.C. the trial court is under obligation to record its subjective satisfaction after considering the police report duly supported by an affidavit that the accused has 'absconded' and 'concealed himself' and is avoiding the process of the court.
9. On the aforesaid aspect of the case, learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on para 9 of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Pradeep Agnihotri vs. State of U.P. and another in Application under Section 482 No.2218 of 2024.
10. The aforesaid legal proposition has not been disputed by the learned A.G.A.
11. In the aforesaid background of the case, this Court is of the view that the order dated 17.05.2024 is liable to be interfered.
12. Accordingly, the order dated 17.05.2024 so far as it relates to the proceedings under section 82 Cr.P.C. is concerned, is hereby set aside. Remaining part of the order dated 17.05.2024 relating to NBW against the applicants would remain intact. It is contended that the applicant is ready to appear before the trial court and some protection be given. He is allowed/permitted to appear before the trial court within two weeks from today and for this period the N.B.W. shall be kept in abeyance.
13. The application under section 482 Cr.P.C is partly allowed.
Order Date :- 27.5.2024 akhilesh/-