The Court emphasized the need to balance societal interest and personal liberty when issuing NBWs, especially considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on travel.

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. - The present petitions have been filed under Section 401 read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners assailing the order dated 27.11.2021 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, N.I. act (East), Karkardooma Courts, Delhi in Complaint Case No. 417/2019 filed under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments act, 1881, whereby non-bailable warrants (hereinafter, referred to as 'NBWs') were issued against them.

2. Mr. Shatadru Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the absence of the petitioners before the Trial Court was unintentional. It is further submitted that the petitioners have filed their respective undertakings by way of affidavits before this Court, in terms of which they have undertaken to appear before the Trial Court on the next date of hearing, i.e. 02.06.2022.

3. Learned counsel for respondent No.1/complainant, on instructions, submits that in view of the undertakings given on behalf of the petitioners, respondent No.1 has no objection in case the NBWs issued against them are cancelled.

4. It is noted that three petitions, being CRL.M.Cs. 266/2021, 267/2021 and 268/2021, have been filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking quashing of the Complaint Case No. 417/2019, wherein the impugned order dated 27.11.2021 came to be passed.

5. a perusal of the order sheets in the aforesaid cases would show that on 22.11.2021, learned counsel for the petitioners had submitted that the petitioners were not residents of Delhi. Pursuant thereto, it was directed that relevant application seeking exemption from personal appearance be filed before the concerned Trial Court, which shall be dealt with in accordance with law.

6. On 27.11.2021, separate applications seeking exemption from personal appearance were moved before the Trial Court on behalf of the petitioners, stating that they resided outside Delhi and it would be difficult for them to travel to Delhi and appear before the Court under the circumstances.

7. The said applications came to be heard on the same day and the Court observed:-

'..Today an exemption has been moved on behalf of accused no. 3,4 and 5. None has appeared on behalf of remaining accused persons. Grounds made out in the exemption application do not reflect any justifiable reasons for not appearing in court simply because they are not residents of Delhi. admittedly as per submissions of Ld. Counsel for accused, there is no stay on the present proceedings/quashing petition pending before Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. In view thereof, no cogent grounds are made out to allow the exemption.

xxx

In view thereof, considering that matter has been languishing at the hands of the accused persons who have already got their warrants cancelled on previous dates without furnishing any bail bond and surety bond, issue NBW against all accused persons..'

8. On the aspect of issuance of NBWs against an accused, the Supreme Court in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin v. State of Maharashtra and another reported as (2012) 9 SCC 719, has observed as follows:-

'10. It needs little emphasis that since the execution of a non-bailable warrant directly involves curtailment of liberty of a person, warrant of arrest cannot be issued mechanically, but only after recording satisfaction that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it is warranted. The courts have to be extra-cautious and careful while directing issue of non-bailable warrant else a wrongful detention would amount to denial of constitutional mandate envisaged in article 21 of the Constitution of India. at the same time, there is no gainsaying that the welfare of an individual must yield to that of the community. Therefore, in order to maintain the rule of law and to keep the society in functional harmony, it is necessary to strike a balance between an individual's rights, liberties and privileges on the one hand, and the State on the other. Indeed, it is a complex exercise. as Cardozo, J.