THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM v. THE STATE OF ASSAM

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl. Pet./1036/2023 ANOWAR MONDAL S/O FAJAL HAQUE R/O VILL- SHAHAPUR P.S. SHORBHUG DIST. BARPETA, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MD I H LASKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN Date : 26-09-2023 ORDER Heard Mr. I. H. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P.for the State Respondent. In this petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner has put to challenge the order, dated 23.11.2022, and all subsequent orders passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baksa, Mushalpur in P.R.C. Case No. 458/2021, arising out of Gobardhana P.S.Case No. 119/2017. It is to be noted herein that vide impugned order, dated 23.11.2022, and vide all subsequent orders, the learned Court below has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner.

Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was charge sheeted in Gobardhana P.S.Case No. 119/2017, u/s 380 IPC, and the petitioner had appeared before the learned Court below on 20.9.2022, and the learned Court below had allowed him to remain on previous bail and thereafter , on 23.11.2022, the petitioner could not appear before the learned Court below, as he Page No.# 2/2 was instructed by his engaged counsel that the offence is of petty nature and the government had withdrawn the case, and on such count, the petitioner remains absent in the Court, for which the learned Court below had issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner. Mr. Laskar, learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner is ready to face the trial and will appear before the learned Court below on each and every day, and therefore, it is contended to allow this petitioner to appear before the learned Court below and to keep the warrant of arrest issued against him abeyance, till his appearance before the learned Court below.

On the other hand, Mr. P. Borthakur, learned Addl. P.P. submits that the petitioner remains absent before the Court below 23.11.2022, without any steps and therefore, the learned Court below has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner and as such, the impugned order suffers from no infirmity or illegality and therefore, it is contended to dismiss the petition. Having heard the submission of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also perused the impugned order dated 23.11.2022. It appears that after submission of charge sheet, the petitioner appeared before the learnedCourt below and vide order dated 28.9.2022, the learned Court below had allowed the petitioner to remain on previous bail. But, subsequently on 23.11.2022, he remained absent without steps for which the learned Court below had issued non bailable warrant of arrest against him.