Facts of the Case

  • The applicant, Sanjeev, filed an application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking the quashing of a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW) dated June 8, 2022.
  • The NBW was issued by the Special Judge (Gangster)/Additional Session Judge, Court No. 8, Agra, in GST No. 265 of 2009 (State Vs. Luxman and others).
  • The case arose from Case Crime No. 905 of 2007 at Police Station: Hari Parvat, District: Agra, involving offences under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act.
  • The applicant had previously been granted bail and was on bail during the trial process.
  • Due to the disruptions caused by the Covid-19 pandemic, the applicant failed to appear before the trial court and was unable to receive regular updates regarding the listing and hearing dates of his case.
  • Consequently, due to his non-appearance, the learned trial court issued non-bailable warrants against him on June 8, 2022.

Issues Involved

  • Whether the Non-Bailable Warrants (NBW) issued against the applicant under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangster Act due to his absence during the Covid-19 pandemic deserve to be quashed or mitigated under the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.?
  • Whether the applicant should be granted liberty and protection to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail within a specified timeline while ensuring an expeditious disposal of his bail application?

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The learned counsel for the applicant argued that the non-appearance of the applicant before the trial court was neither intentional nor deliberate, but was entirely due to the unprecedented circumstances arising from the Covid-19 pandemic.
  • It was submitted that the applicant did not receive adequate or timely information regarding the listing of the case during the pandemic period, leading to the communication breakdown.
  • The counsel gave a formal undertaking before the High Court that the applicant is fully prepared to co-operate with the trial proceedings without creating further delays.
  • The applicant requested the court's indulgence to grant him liberty to surrender before the trial court and apply for regular bail, with a direction to the trial court to dispose of the bail plea expeditiously and in accordance with established law.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The learned Additional Government Advocate (A.G.A.) appearing for the State of U.P. opposed the absolute quashing of the warrants, emphasizing the gravity of charges under the U.P. Gangster Act.
  • However, considering the undertaking of the applicant to surrender and participate in the trial, the State primarily insisted that the process of law must be adhered to and the applicant must submit to the jurisdiction of the trial court.

Court Order / Findings

  • The High Court, presided over by Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar, J., heard both the sides and reviewed the contents of the application without diving into the deep merits of the main criminal case.
  • Taking into consideration the explicit submission and undertaking provided by the applicant's counsel, the court deemed it fit in the interest of justice to dispose of the application with specific directives.
  • The High Court ordered that if the applicant surrenders before the trial court within a strict period of three weeks from the date of the order (November 18, 2022) and applies for bail, the trial court must endeavor to decide the bail application expeditiously and strictly in accordance with the law.

Important Clarification

  • This ruling emphasizes that non-appearance during exceptional global crises like the Covid-19 pandemic should be viewed with a balanced judicial perspective, especially when an applicant shows bona fide intent to co-operate with the trial.
  • Rather than keeping NBWs active indefinitely, the High Court utilized Section 482 Cr.P.C. to facilitate a structured surrender timeline, ensuring the trial is not stalled while protecting the applicant's procedural right to seek bail expeditiously.

Section Involved

  • Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Inherent powers of the High Court).
  • Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

Link to download the order -https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783317347_932compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content.The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.