SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ajay Mehra And 5 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 7 March, 2019


?Court No. – 68

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 8809 of 2019

Applicant :- Ajay Mehra And 5 Ors

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr

Counsel for Applicant :- Annapurna Devi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the bailable warrant dated 2.6.2017 passed by Judicial Magistrate-I, Meerut in Case Crime No. 195 of 2016 (State Vs. Ajay Mehra and others) under section 307, 377, 498A, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Falawada, District Meerut.

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that no offence against the applicants is disclosed and the present prosecution has been instituted with a malafide intention for the purposes of harassment. He has further contended that the applicants were not aware about the proceedings of aforesaid case due to which they could not appear or surrender before the court below. It has further been contended that the husband of O.P. No. 2 Ajay Mehra has been bailed out and Jile Singh, Jeth of O.P. No. 2 has died. The applicant no. 1 is ready to live with O.P. No. 2 who is his wife. The order of bailable warrant is not in accordance with law.

A perusal of the record shows that in this case the I.O. after collecting evidence has submitted charge-sheet against the applicants. Due to absence of applicants bailable warrant has been issued in this case.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find any ground to quash the bailable warrant dated 2.6.2017 issued in the aforesaid case, therefore, the prayer for quashing the same is hereby refused.

However, it is directed that if the applicants appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days from today and apply for bail, their prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon’ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. For a period of 30 days from today or till the disposal of the application for grant of bail whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants. However, in case, the applicants do not appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period, coercive action shall be taken against them.

With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.

Order Date :- 7.3.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation