Lucknow: The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court has stayed further proceedings against Abbas Ansari, sitting MLA from Mau (U.P.), in a case registered under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code, arising out of alleged non-compliance with proclamation proceedings in a separate criminal matter.
The order was passed by Hon’ble Justice Rajeev Singh on an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the charge sheet and summoning order. The applicant had prayed for quashing of “the illegal, arbitrary, mechanical and frivolous charge sheet No. 01 dated 24.04.2023 and the cognizance-cum-summoning order dated 12.07.2023 in Case No. 75348 of 2023, F.I.R. No. 312 of 2022 under Section 174-A I.P.C., Police Station Mahanagar, District Lucknow, as well as the entire proceedings in the said F.I.R.”
The proceedings under Section 174-A IPC stem from F.I.R. No. 431 of 2019 registered under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC and Section 30 of the Arms Act. In that case, bailable and non-bailable warrants were issued and an order under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was subsequently passed. On the allegation that the applicant failed to appear despite the proclamation, a fresh F.I.R. No. 312 of 2022 under Section 174-A IPC came to be lodged.
Appearing for the applicant, learned counsel Mr. Ishan Baghel and Mr. Razaur Rahman contended that the statutory procedure for initiating prosecution under Section 174-A IPC had not been followed. It was argued that such proceedings could not be instituted through a police F.I.R., and reliance was placed on the Division Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Sumit & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors. It was further submitted that the earlier proceedings had been carried to the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 9315 of 2022.
From the record, the High Court noted the factual position regarding service of summons and warrants. The Court recorded:
“The record reveals that the house on which notice was pasted had been seized by the police.”
The Court also took note of the interim protection granted by the Supreme Court in the earlier proceedings and observed:
“The proceedings of the F.I.R. in question were stayed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 19.10.2022 on the ground that the house where the summons and bailable warrants were served had already been seized by the authorities and, on the date of service of notice, the said house was not in occupation of the applicant or his family members.”
Taking into consideration the legal issue raised and the precedent relied upon, the Court observed:
“As the Division Bench of this Court has already decided the identical controversy in the case of Sumit & Anr. v. State of U.P. & Ors., passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 17560 of 2023, the matter requires consideration.”
Opposing the application, learned Additional Advocate General Sri V.K. Shahi, assisted by Sri Vivek Gupta, A.G.A., submitted that the applicant had not cooperated with the investigation and was absconding, and that bailable as well as non-bailable warrants were issued on the basis of material placed before the Magistrate.
After hearing the parties, the Court granted interim protection and directed the filing of affidavits.
Appearances:
For the Applicant – Mr. Ishan Baghel, Mr. Razaur Rahman and Mr. Qazi Sabihur Rahman.
For the State – Mr. V.K. Shahi, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Vivek Gupta, A.G.A.
Case Title: Abbas Ansari v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow (Application U/s 482 No. 11061 of 2025)
!["No Loudspeakers For Azan, No Fundamental Right To Create Noise," Says Allahabad HC To Two Mosques [Read Judgment]](/secure/uploads/2020/01/lj_4995_Allahabad_HC_AZAN.jpg)
