The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad Court has dismissed the petition of Jugnu Walia, close aide of gangster-turned-politician Mukhtar Ansari.
Jugnu Walia filed a petition in the Court, challenging the production warrant issued against him, citing the danger to his life in coming to Lucknow.
A Single Bench of Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I passed this order while hearing an application under Section 482 filed by Harvinder Singh alias Jugnu Walia.
The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed inter alia praying for following reliefs:-
“(i) Summon the records of the case.
(ii) Quash and set aside the order dated 08.05.2023 and production warrant dated 08.05.2023 passed/issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow has allowed the application filed by SHO, PS Alambagh, Lucknow and issued a production warrant against the applicant in connection with FIR/crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B I.P.C and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow.
(iii) Direct the opposite party to dispense with the physical presence and production of the applicant in respect of investigation being conducted into F.I.R/Crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B IPC and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow; due to serious threat and apprehension to the life and well being of the applicant.
(iv) Direct the opposite party to question/interrogate the applicant in FIR/Crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B IPC and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow; through online mode/video conferencing mode or within the precincts of Central Jail, Ropar in view of the serious threat and apprehension with regard to the security, well being in life and liberty of the applicant.
(v) Stay the operation and implementation of order dated 08.05.2023 and production warrant dated 08.05.2023 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow from issuing fresh Production Warrant against the applicant in connection with FIR/Crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B I.P.C and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow”.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the order dated 08.05.2023 and production warrant dated 08.05.2023 issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, whereby the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow has allowed the application filed by S.H.O, P.S Alambagh, Lucknow and issued a production warrant against the applicant in connection with F.I.R/Crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B IPC and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow is patently illegal and deserves to be set aside having regard to the fact that such production warrant could not have been issued in the facts of this case and also because the same has come to be passed without advertising to the risk to the life of the applicant while he would be taken to the destination for which he has been summoned, by means of a production warrant.
Per contra, Vinod Sahi, Additional Advocate General, assisted by Anurag Verma, AGA and Alok Saran, AGA has vehemently opposed aforesaid submission advanced by the counsel for the applicant by submitting that a production warrant has rightly been issued by the competent Magistrate for production the applicant in connection with F.I.R/Crime under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 387, 120B I.P.C and Section 7 of CLA Act, Police Station Alambagh, Lucknow on being satisfied, on the basis of material placed before the Magistrate concerned in accordance with provision contained in Section 267 CrPC.
They submitted that the apprehension expressed by the counsel for the applicant regarding the threat to the applicant’s life while being brought to Lucknow is thoroughly misplaced and baseless as the State would always undertake this exercise diligently and cautiously with adequate security arrangements which are warranted in a given situation. They, thus, submitted that no one including the applicant should have any such apprehension.
The Court observed that in view of the aforesaid submission advanced by the Additional Advocate General, assisted by the Additional Government Advocates, counsel for the applicant has very fairly stated that he does not want to press the application and prays that the same may be dismissed as withdrawn, at this stage, with liberty to seek appropriate remedy which may be available to him in accordance with law.
Accordingly, the Court dismissed the application as withdrawn, with the aforesaid liberty.