High Court · 2024

1. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for State.

2. Learned A.G.A. points out that earlier an Application U/S 482 No. 10934 of 2024 was filed, wherein on 29.04.2024, a Coordinate Bench of this Court passed following order:- "Mention has been made on behalf of counsel for the applicant for adjournment. List this case on 6th May 2024, in top ten cases. Pendency of the present case shall not be construed stay of the proceedings pending before the court concerned. The court concerned is at liberty to proceed with the case, in accordance with law without giving unnecessary adjournment to both the parties."

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order the trial court has proceeded and consequential order dated 27.08.2024 issuing process u/s 82 Cr.P.C. and order dated 21.10.2024 issuing process u/s 83 Cr.P.C. against the applicant.

4. During pendency of the earlier application this application has been filed with following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to allow this application and quash the impugned order/ NBW dated 28.03.2024 and consequential order dated 27.08.2024 issuing process u/s 82 Cr.P.C. and order dated 21.10.2024 issuing process u/s 83 Cr.P.C. in Case No. 527 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 160 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Barsathi, District Jaunpur, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M.-IV, Jaunpur."

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant is the husband of opposite party no.2. He is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Allegations levelled against him regarding dowry and harassment are false. He further submits that applicant has not committed any offence in the alleged F.I.R. in any way. He next submits that after investigation police has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant and learned Magistrate has taken cognizance on 13.06.2023 and summoned the applicant. He further submits that due to personal difficulty the applicants could not appear before the Court below, therefore, non- bailable warrants and proceeding u/s 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been issued against him. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that some time may be granted to the applicants to surrender/appear before the Court concerned. Learned counsel for the applicant has admitted that the applicant has not appeared before the trial court for facing the trial.

6. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer by contending that F.I.R. is of the year 2022 registered under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. The applicant is the husband of opposite party no.2. Due to non-appearance before the trial Court order to issue N.B.W. was passed on 28.03.2024 and after the aforesaid proceedings of Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. have been issued against him. It cannot be said that said orders have been passed illegally.

7. It is unbelievable that in the present case F.I.R. is of the year 2022 and co-accused persons (mother and father of the applicant) have attended the court proceedings regularly and have been granted bail vide order dated 16.04.2024. It appears from the record that the applicant has deliberately avoided the process of law, therefore, he cannot be entitled to any relief from this Court in exercise of extraordinary powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. He has failed to substantiate before this Court in view of the reasoning stated hereinabove that due to personal difficulty he could not appear before the court concerned. The proceedings of the court concerned have been held up on account of non-appearance of the applicant and as such he is fleeing from the process of law without any reasonable cause.

8. "Fleeing from justice" refers to the act of accused in evading or avoiding arrest, prosecution, or punishment for a crime. An accused in aforesaid act tries to avoid facing criminal prosecution by often avoiding summons, warrants and other process issued by the court. An accused is legally bound to comply with the summons issued by the court of law except where the process is challenged before the higher forum by the accused. Any person who has been issued process by court of law cannot be permitted to evade the same thereby not permitting the court of law to proceed in the administration of justice. The said act of accused in avoiding the process of court of law without any justification effects the very cause of justice. An accused fleeing from justice without reasonable cause has the effect of stopping/slowing the criminal process of law which effects the cause of speedy justice to the victim or society at large. Non appearance of an accused before the court concerned when the summons has been served (without reasonable explanation for non-appearance) may be indicative of the fact that such accused do not have respect to the process of law.

9. It is important for rule of law to prevail that the criminal trial is completed without delay. Where an accused flees from the process of law and thereby avoids appearing before the court, the very concept of speedy trial is put at peril and justice to the victim is delayed.

10. The supreme court in Vipan Kumar Dhir v. State of Punjab, (2021) 15 SCC 518 has observed that while granting bail, the possibility of the accused to influence prosecution witnesses, fleeing from justice or creating other impediments in the fair investigation, ought not to be overlooked.

11. While considering the question of whether an accused is fleeing from justice, the conduct of the accused in respect of the process of law is required to be considered. In criminal prosecution when the court find material against the accused sufficient for prosecution, the court issues summons or warrants for appearance to the accused for participation in the trial. When the summons or warrants are served on the accused in accordance with law then duty is cast on the accused to appear before the court concerned except where there exists justification for non-appearance of the accused before the accused. An accused who is served with the process of court and fails to appear before the court concerned without any reasonable cause can be said to be fleeing from the process of law.

12. In the present case, the F.I.R. is of the year 2022, no reasonable explanation has been offered by the learned counsel for the applicants for non-appearance of the applicants before the court concerned in pursuance to summons/warrant issued by the court concerned. Learned counsel for the applicants has not shown any facts and circumstances to demonstrate that applicants were not fleeing from process of law or evading justice. In the facts and circumstances the applicants are fleeing from the process of law and evading justice, as such do not deserve any protection in exercise of the extraordinary jurisdiction of this court.

13. The record appended with the petition in itself demonstrates that the applicants are avoiding the proceedings and have not appeared before the court concerned since 2022, even the co- accused persons (mother and father of the applicant) have appeared before the court and enlarged on bail vide orders dated 16.04.2024. Copy of said orders have been brought on record as Annexure-5 to the petition.

14. In view of the facts, it is evident that the applicant has no respect for the proceedings of the court and have remained absent from the court proceedings for a period of about 2 years which is indicative of the fact that the applicant is fleeing from the process of law. Therefore, prayer in respect of applicant is refused and the application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby dismissed.

15. However, it is provided that if the applicant appears and surrenders before the court below and applies for bail, then the bail application of the applicant be considered and decided as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. Order Date :- 12.12.2024 Abhishek Singh