Disposed¶28

Sri Paramesh Mallick v. D. G Pharma and Anr.

Gauhati HC9 Jul 2025Crl.Pet./790/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Gauhati High Court; Crl.Pet./790/2025; order dated 10.07.2025; Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.; Section 528 BNSS 2023; Section 138 NI Act 1881; non-bailable warrant of arrest; operation of NBW in abeyance till 25.07.2025; JMFC Kamrup (M); C.R. Case No. 3306/2021; cheque dishonour complaint by D.G Pharma; petitioner Paramesh Mallick; communication gap non-appearance; compromise/amicable settlement talks; bail Rs. 10,000 with like surety; direction to appear before Trial Court and seek appropriate relief; petition disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Operation of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner remained in abeyance till 25.07.2025; petitioner directed to appear before the Trial Court on that date and may seek appropriate relief there; criminal petition disposed of. ¶28

Sri Paramesh Mallick Vs D. G Pharma and Anr. — Cheque Dishonour | Gauhati HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶28

Issue for consideration

Whether the operation of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner should be kept in abeyance, given the ongoing settlement talks and the petitioner's readiness to appear before the Trial Court on the next date fixed (25.07.2025).

¶26

Court's answer

To facilitate the petitioner's appearance, the operation of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against him shall remain in abeyance till 25.07.2025, in view of the ongoing amicable settlement talks and his readiness to face the trial.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

On 25.07.2025 the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court and may make the prayer for seeking appropriate relief before the Trial Court.

¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Gauhati High Court (Mridul Kumar Kalita, J.), Crl.Pet./790/2025, order dated 10.07.2025: Petition under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 by Sri Paramesh Mallick, proprietor of M/S Vivekananda Drug Distributors, impugning the order dated 28.02.2024 of the learned JMFC, Kamrup (M) in C.R. Case No. 3306/2021 (a complaint under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, 1881 filed by respondent firm D.G Pharma), whereby a non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against him after he failed to appear on 28.02.2024 owing to a communication gap, despite having earlier appeared and furnished bail of Rs. 10,000 with like surety. With compromise talks ongoing and the petitioner expressing readiness to appear on the next date fixed (25.07.2025), the Court kept the operation of the non-bailable warrant in abeyance till 25.07.2025, directed the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court on that date and observe that he may pray for appropriate relief there, and disposed of the criminal petition.

Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010145622025

2025:GAU-AS:8893

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : Crl.Pet./790/2025

¶6

SRI PARAMESH MALLICK S/O- JATINDRA MALLICK, R/O- VILL. NO.2, BHETAGAON, NEAR BIJNI VIDYAPEETH HIGH SCHOOL. DIST.- CHIRANG, PIN-783390, ASSAM AND PROPRIETOR OF M/S VIVEKANANDA DRUG DISTRIBUTORS.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

D. G PHARMA AND ANR

¶9

A PARTNERSHIP FIRM OF SRI DEVESH GHORAWAT AND SRI NITIN GHORAWAT HAVING ITS OFFICE SITUATED AT 1ST FLOOR, ASHOKA HOUSE, NEAR ATHGAON GOSALA, K.C. ROAD CHATRIBARI, GUWAHATI781008, DIST.- KAMRUP(M), ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY IT'S MANAGER SRI ASH KARAN RANKA, S/O- LATE AMOLAKH CHAND RANKA.

¶10

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP ASSAM

¶11

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. R SARMA, D SARMA,MR. R AHMED,MR. B.J. BRAHMA,A H CHOUDHURY

¶12

Advocate for the Respondent : ,

¶13

Page No.# 2/3

¶14

BEFORE

¶15

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA

¶16

ORDER

¶17

10.07.2025

¶18

1. Heard Mr. R. Sarma, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam.

¶19

2. This application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Paramesh Mallick impugning the order dated 28.02.2024, passed by the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kamrup (M) in C.R. Case No. 3306/2021, whereby the Trial Court issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner.

¶20

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondent No. 1 has filed a case under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, 1881 against the present petitioner, which is registered as C.R. Case No. 3306/2021.

¶21

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after receiving summons from the Trial Court, the petitioner had appeared before the Trial Court and he was allowed to go on bail of Rs. 10,000/with a surety of like amount. He submits that on 28.02.2024, when the aforesaid case was fixed before the Trial Court, the petitioner could not appear before the said Court due to some communication gap and on that day, the Trial Court issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against him.

¶22

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in the

¶23

Page No.# 3/3

¶24

C.R. Case, there is a talk of compromise going on between the parties and there is a possibility of an amicable settlement between the parties. The petitioner also submits that he is ready to appear before the Trial Court on the next date fixed, i.e. on 25.07.2025. However, as the non-bailable warrant of arrest has already been issued against him, he is apprehensive that he may be arrested in execution of the said warrant of arrest.

¶25

6. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court opposes to dispose of this criminal petition without issuing notice to the respondent No. 1.

¶26

7. As there is a talk of amicable settlement going on between the parties and as the petitioner is ready to face the trial, and appear before the Trial Court on the next date fixed, to facilitate his appearance, the operation of non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against him shall remain in abeyance till 25.07.2025.

¶27

8. On that day, the petitioner shall appear before the Trial Court and may make the prayer for seeking appropriate relief before the Trial Court.

¶28

9. This criminal petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶29

JUDGE

¶30

Comparing Assistant

Sri Paramesh Mallick v. D. G Pharma and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri Paramesh Mallick v. D. G Pharma and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt Laldingliani Vs Sh Lalbiakvela (L) s/b Laldingliana and 3 Ors.

Sh. Zolianlunga and 17 Ors. Vs The State of Mizoram and 4 Ors.

Union of India and 5 Ors. Vs Sh. Hmingdailova and 4 Ors.

Arup Kumar Pathak Vs Dharani Dhar Nath and Anr.

Guneshwar Bharali @ Guneswar Bharali Vs the State of Nagaland

Abou Sufiyan Siddique and Ors. Vs Smti. Nilima Parbin