Chamela Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Chamela Vs State of U.P. — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application finally disposed of: applicant may appear before the court below within three weeks and apply for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant, such application to be decided in the light of the observations in Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth (2022) 11 SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh (2021 SCC Online SC 941); execution of the non-bailable warrant kept in abeyance for three weeks or until the applicant appears, whichever is earlier.

Issue for consideration

Whether the Non-Bailable Warrant issued against the applicant — who submits he was on bail, that the impugned order was passed without satisfying itself that summons and other processes for attendance were served, and that no summons or bailable warrant preceded the warrant — warrants any direction, NBWs being a measure of last resort. +1 more

Court's answer

Considering the submissions of learned counsel and perusing the record, the application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is finally disposed of with a direction that if the applicant appears before the court below within three weeks and applies for bail/recall of the non-bailable warrant, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the Supreme Court judgments in Satender Kumar Antil, Siddharth and Aman Preet Singh.

Ratio / Principle

For a period of three weeks from the date of the order, or until the applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of the non-bailable warrant against the applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.; Court No. 75) finally disposed of an application under S.528 BNSS (Application U/S 528 BNSS No. 36609 of 2025) by Chamela seeking quashing of the order dated 16.12.2023 of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Jaunpur, in Criminal Case No. 10734 of 2020 (arising out of Criminal Case No. 268 of 2007, Ss.323, 324, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Machhalishahar, District Jaunpur), whereby a Non Bailable Warrant was issued against the applicant. Counsel for the applicant was permitted to correct the prayer, wrongly mentioned due to inadvertence. It was submitted that the applicant was on bail when the NBW was issued, that the order issued without confirming service of summons/other processes, and that NBWs should issue only as a last resort after failure to respond to notices/summons and bailable warrant; the learned A.G.A. opposed. The Court disposed of the application with a direction that if the applicant appears before the court below within three weeks and applies for bail/recall of the NBW, the application shall be decided in the light of the Supreme Court observations in Satender Kumar Antil (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth (2022) 11 SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh (2021 SCC Online SC 941); execution of the NBW was kept in abeyance for three weeks or until the applicant appears, whichever is earlier.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 36609 of 2025

Chamela

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P.

.....Opposite Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rajesh Kumar Gautam
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

Court No. - 75

HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to inadvertence the prayer has been wrongly mentioned.

Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to correct the same during the course of hearing.

Sri Rajesh Kumar Gautam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Karunakar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the order dated 16.12.2023 in Criminal Case No. 10734 of 2020 arising out of Criminal Case No. 268 of 2007, under Sections 323, 324, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police Station Machhalishahar, District Jaunpur pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Jaunpur whereby Non Bailable Warrant has been issued against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was on bail at the time of issuing of Non-Bailable Warrant. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without satisfying itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the position of law. It is settled position of law that N.B.W. should be issued as a last resort after the litigant fails to respond the notices/summons and bailable warrant. It is further submitted that non-bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summon and bailable warrant.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application.

NA528 No. 36609 of 2025

2

Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is finally disposed of with a direction that in case applicant appears before the court below within three weeks from today and applies for bail/recall of non bailable warrant, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941.

For a period of three weeks from today or till applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant against applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

October 13, 2025 Ishan

(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad