Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

In view of the fact, let this matter be placed before Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha, J. after obtaining nomination from Hon'ble The Chief Justice, if possible, on 17.7.2014 as fresh."

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed praying for setting aside the order dated 2.6.2014 passed by IInd Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1086 of 2009 under Sections 403, 405, 423, 120-B/34 I.P.C. dismissing the application moved by the applicant under the provisions of Section 205/317 Cr.P.C. to exempt the applicant from personal appearance.

The special leave petition is dismissed as withdrawn accordingly."

8. It is apparent from the order dated 31.3.2014 passed by the Apex Court that another SLP (Crl.) No. 5278 of 2013 was also filed by opposite party no.2 before it which was dismissed as withdrawn in view of the order passed in the SLP NO. 4905 of 2014 on the request of counsel for the petitioner in the said case,

9. Thereafter the applicant filed an application under Section 205/317 Cr.P.C. some time in May, 2014 for grant of exemption from personal appearance before the Court of Additional Chief Judgicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 1086 pf 2009 under Sections 403, 405, 423, 120-B/34 I.P.C.,in view of the order dated 31.3.2014 passed by the Apex Court in SLP No. 5905 of 2013. The opposite party no. 2 filed an objection to the application of the applicant claiming exemption under Section 205/317 Cr.P.C. The learned Magistrate after hearing the counsel for the parties rejected the exemption application of the applicant vide order dated 2.6.2014 and issued non bailable warrant against the applicant and other co-accused persons for securing their presence before it. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant has preferred the present 482 Cr.P.C. application.

17. From the impugned order passed by the learned Magistrate, it also appears that earlier also similar application for exemption of his personal appearance was moved on 23.3.2012 under Section 205 Cr.P.C. before the court below and the same was rejected by the Magistrate on 15.6.2012 against which the applicant preferred a petition before this Court but his prayer was not accepted by this Court too. The learned Magistrate was of the view that the applicant is a foreign national and the offence against him is serious nature hence in order to secure his presence before this Court it is necessary that he should obtain bail in the case. The conduct of the applicant reflects that he is absconding from the clutches of law for the last 9 years and has no intention to surrender before the law of the land and has flouted the orders of the court of law even the orders of the Apex Court which has repeatedly granted him indulgence in staying his warrant of arrest but then too he has not appeared nor surrender nor obtained bail from the competent court of the country, hence the learned Magistrate has rightly not exercised his discretion as per the provisions of Section 205 read with 317 Cr.P.C.

Hence, this Court cannot grant any relief to the petitioner by permitting him to appear before trial court to participate in the trial without getting him bailed out."

20. Thus from the aforesaid two judgments of the High Courts and various other judgments of the Apex Court referred by the Magistrate in the impugned order and taking into account the conduct of the applicant, who has been avoiding the proceedings of criminal case pending against him for the last nine years and has not even abide by the orders/directions of the Apex Court given on 31.3.2014, the exemption application of the applicant moved under Section 205/317 Cr.P.C. was rightly rejected by the Magistrate as the applicant failed to appear and surrender before the court below and has also not obtained bail from the competent court and has straightway moved an exemption application for dispensing his personal appearance permanently which in my humble opinion probably is also not the intent of the order passed by the Apex Court on 31.3.2014.