SHAIK YOUSUF Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is A.5. in C.C.No. 100 of 1997, which is pending on the file of the IX Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. For his default in appearing before that Court, on 4-7-2001 a non-bailable warrant was ordered to be issued against him.

(2.) The petitioner filed an application under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure explaining, inter alia, that he was undergoing medical treatment with Dr. Mohd. Mohiuddin for Renal Colic with urinary tract infection. The Court below dismissed his application on the premise that it felt necessary to give a personal hearing to the accused. It is not known whether it is in respect of the present application or it is for the purpose of examining the accused in the main case. In ordinary course, a warrant should have been recalled if the Court is convinced that his absence on earlier occasion was not wilful. Even otherwise, if for any reason the petitioner is brought by executing a warrant issued against him, still he can be enlarged on bail. These things are simple and they shall not delay the disposal of the main case.

(3.) For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the petitioner herein is directed to appear before the Court below on the next adjournment date when the case stands posted.