SIYA RAM Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Additional Government Advocate. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners with the prayer to quash proceedings relating to Criminal Misc. Case No. 3344 of 2008, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh and also to quash order dated 23.3.2009, contained in Annexure no.2, by means of which non-bailable warrants of arrest have been issued against them. As it comes out that a case was registered vide Case Crime No. 747 of 2007, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504 and 506 IPC at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh in which the police after completing investigation had submitted charge sheet vide charge sheet no. 301 of 2007 dated 1.11.2007. It also comes out from Annexure No. 6 that subsequently in the same crime number, the police had submitted final report on 14.8.2008 but in spite of it, the court below without application of mind had issued non-bailable warrants of arrest against the petitioners on 23.3.2009 (Annexure No.2). The submission of learned counsel for the petitioners is that instead of passing appropriate order on the final report submitted by the police in the aforesaid case crime number, the court below has wrongly issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners. Let the things be as they are, the petitioners shall by means of an application, bring the aforesaid facts to the notice of the court concerned within ten days from today. In case the petitioners move an application within the time granted above, bringing the aforesaid facts to the notice of the Court below, the court concerned shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with law before proceeding any further. It is further provided that till said application, if so moved, is disposed of, execution of the non- bailable warrants dated 23.3.2009 issued by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pratapgarh against the petitioners shall be kept in abeyance. It is made clear that as soon as the court below passes the order on the application moved by the petitioners, the benefit of this order shall not be available to the petitioners. It is further made clear that if the petitioners fail to abide by the directions issued above regarding moving application within ten days, benefit of this order shall not be available to them. With the aforesaid observations/directions, this petition is disposed of finally.