In a criminal petition challenging a non-bailable warrant of arrest, the Gauhati High Court kept the warrant in abeyance while directing the petitioner to appear in court to seek its recall.
Warrant of arrest kept in abeyance; petitioner directed to appear and apply for recall.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/2
GAHC010017062019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet. 257/2019
1:NITUL HAQUE S/O LATE SAMSUL HAQUE, R/O VILLAGE KUWARITOL, P.O. KALIABOR, P.S. KALIABOR, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782137
VERSUS
1:THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR. REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM
2:CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO. LTD. HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT-DARE HOUSE NO. 2 N.S.C. BOSE ROAD CHENNAI-600001 REGIONAL OFFICE AT-ARCON ARCADE 2ND FLOOR B. BARUAH ROAD OPP. KANAKLATA INDOOR STADIUM ULUBARI GUWAHATI-78100
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D P BORAH
Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIR ALFAZ ALI
ORDER
Date : 13-03-2019
Heard Mr. D.P. Borah, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Page No.# 2/2
Aggrieved by the order dated 04-07-2018, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Kamrup (M), Guwahati, in C.R. Case No. 4086/2017, whereby the learned Magistrate issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner, the present petition has been filed praying for quashing the said order issuing NBWA.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is an accused in the aforementioned complaint case. As the petitioner is staying at Arunachal Pradesh in connection with his work, he could not appear personally and the learned counsel has been taking steps on behalf of the accused petitioner. However, on 04-07-2018 when the learned counsel for the petitioner again filed an application seeking adjournment on behalf of the petitioner, learned Magistrate rejected the application and issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against him. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that absence of the petitioner on 04-07-2018 was not intentional, inasmuch as, he was outside the State and therefore, he could not appear and the steps on his behalf was taken by his counsel. It is also submitted, that the petitioner has now come back and is ready and willing to appear before the learned trial court, and as such, prayed for recalling the warrant of arrest.
Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the facts and circumstances, under which the non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued, this petition is disposed of with a direction, that the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on the next date fixed and file appropriate application praying for re-calling the warrant of arrest, if so advised. In the event of filling such application, the trial court shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
Till then, the warrant of arrest issued by the learned trial court shall be kept in abeyance.
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to recall the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner who is outside the state.
NITUL HAQUE
THE STATE OF ASSAM
CHOLAMANDALAM INVESTMENT AND FINANCE CO. LTD.
MIR ALFAZ ALI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
