Allowed

Ashwin Kumar Jaiswal v. State of Telangana

Telangana HC8 Sept 2026CRLP/14521/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Criminal Court quashed Non-Bailable Warrants issued against the petitioners in C.C. No. 2454 of 2023. The High Court held that issuing NBWs without effective service of summons and without recording reasons is impermissible under law, relying on principles from Thammisetty Vasu and other precedents regarding proper procedure.

What did the court decide?

Non-Bailable Warrants issued against the petitioners were quashed. Petitioners directed to appear on 11.09.2026 with execution of personal bond.

Ashwin Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

TUESDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J. SREENIVAS RAO

¶5

CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 14521 OF 2026

¶6

Between:

¶7

Ashwin Kumar Jaiswal, S/o Late K.P. Jaiswal, age.58^yrs Occ. Advocate

¶8

Thakur Surekha Deep Singh, Wo Late T.Pradeep Singh, Age.57^yrs Occ. Advocate

¶9

Both R/o 11-6-649, opp 2nd gate, Nampally Criminal Courts, Hyderabad

¶10

...Petitioner/Accused No - 1 & 2

¶11

AND

¶12

'1 . State of Telangana, Rep. by Public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad.

¶13

Shreyanshi Jaiswal, D/o Ashwin Kumar Jaiswal age 24^yrs occ. student^Ri./o 3rd floor KP Bhavan Boggulkunta kamaneni Hospital Lane^Hyd

¶14

...Respondents

¶15

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^{pleased to} Quash the Non- Bailable Warrant dated 06^{11212024 issued against the Petitionersin} C.C.No.2454 of 2023 on the file of 12th Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate^Court Nampally Hyderabad.

¶16

l.A. NO: 1OF 2026

¶17

Petition under Section 528 of BNSS^praying that in the circumstances statedⁱⁿ the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition, the High Court may be^pleased to stay all further^proceeding including execution of^{NBWs pending againstthe} petitioners in CCno.245412023 pending on the file of 12th ACJM court Nampally Hyderabad, pending disposal of the criminal^petition.

¶18

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon^perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal Petition and upon hearing the arguments of Sri^{Thakur RoopaSingh,} Advocate for the Petitioner and the Mr. Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Additional^Public Prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent No.1 and of None appeared^{for the} Respondent No. 2.

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

F9l!=:5:5.181..'.':17

¶21

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR TTIE STATE OF I'ELANGANA AT HYDERABAI)

¶22

THE TIONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE J.SREENIVAS RAO

¶23

CRIMINAL PETITI ON No.14521 of 2026

¶24

CNR No. : HBHC010599292026

¶25

Date:08.09.2026

¶26

Between:

¶27

Ashwin Kumar Jaiswal and another

¶28

...1)etitioners

¶29

AND

¶30

The State ofTelangana and another

¶31

...Respondents

¶32

ORDER

¶33

This Criminal Petition has been filed aggrievcd by the docket

¶34

order passed in C.C.No.2454 of 2023 on the file of learned XII

¶35

Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderrbad in issuing Non-Bailable Warrants against the petitioners/accu se,l Nos.1 and 2 on 06.t2.2024.

¶36

Heard Ms.Thakur Roopa Singh, leamed counsel for the petitioners and Mr.Jithender Rao Veeramalla, leamed Additional

¶37

Public Prosecutor, appearing for respodnetn No.l.

¶38

¶39

Notice in respect of respondent^{No.2 is dispensedwith on the} ground that the petitioners are seeking^{recall of the NBWs issued} against them and are not seeking^{any relief against respondentNo'2'} Respondent No.2 has been^{arrayed onlyas a proformarespondent'} 4. Learned counsel for the^{petitionerssubmitsthat the petitioners} are accused Nos.l and 2 in^{C.C.No.2454of 2023 on the hle of the} leamed XII Additional^{Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,Hyderabad,} punishable for the offences^{underSections324and 506 ofthe Indian} Penal Code, 1860^(for short^{'lPC'). In the said case, the petitioners} have not received summons^{from the trial Court.In the absenceof} effective service of summons^{on the petitioners, the learned trial Court} issued NBWs against^{them on 06.12.2024,which is contrary to the} principles laid down by this^{Court in ThammisettyVaasu v' The State} of Telanganal. She^{furthersubmitsthat, in similar circumstances,this} Court disposed^{of Crl.P'No.8708 of 2026on 16 06.2026'}

¶40

Learned Additional^{Public Prosecutor has not opposedthe} submissions made^{by the learned counsel for the petitioners'}

¶41

Having considered the^{submissionsmade by the respective}

¶42

parties and upon^{perusal of the material available on record, it reveals}

¶43

t 2025 Supreme (Telangana) 2071

EE'EnF!-rrs'rrt

7 l

that the petitioners are accused in C.C.No.24 54 cf 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 324 and 506 ol'Il,C. The specific avennent made in the memorandum of grounds is that the petitioners have not received the summons in C.C.No.2454 of 2023. On 06-12.2024, the learned trial court issued a Non-blilable warrants agarnst the petitioners. ln Thammisetty Vasu (supra), this Court, by dull'taking into consideration the principres laid dow, by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Vikas v. Stute of Rajasthan2, Siddh,zrth v. State of (Jttur Prsdesh3, Lakshay Jaiswal v. State (NCT oJ Delhi)a, Aman Preet Singh v. Central Bureau of Investigations and Raghuvansh Denanchand Bhasin v. State of Maharashtra,, ht;ld. that, in the absence of effective service of summons, the learned trial Court issurng a bailable warrant or a non-bailable warr;rnt against the accused persons is not permissible under law.

¶48

In the case on hand, the learned trial Court issued non_bailable

¶49

warrants against the petitioners on 06.12.2024 without recording any

¶50

reasons or satisfaction, and the same is contrary to the principle laid down by this Court in Thammisetty Vasu (supra).

¶51

'z lzor+;^{: scc :zr}

¶52

'^{(2022)1 scc676}

¶53

4 2O2c SCC Online Del 2583

¶54

5 1zozz1 tt scc rc+

¶55

61zorz1 s scc zsr

¶56

¶57

For the foregoing reasons, the Non-Bailable Warrants issued

¶58

against petitioners are liable to be quashed and accordingly,^quashed. The petitioners shal1 appear before the learned trial Court on 11.09.2026 by executing personal bond as required under the provisions of BNSS. The petitioners sha1l also appear before the trial Court through their counsel on each and every date of adjournment and shall also appear before the trial Court whenever^{their presenceis} speciflcaliy required.

¶59