Non-bailable warrants must be issued with proper legal justification, particularly ensuring evidence is present to support belief of the accused's absconding, balancing individual rights with public interests.

JUDGMENT :

MANISH CHOUDHURY, J.

1. The instant criminal petition under Section 528 , Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [ BNSS ] is preferred to assail an Order dated 23.02.2023 and other subsequent and consequent orders passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup at Amingaon [‘the Trial Court’, for short], whereby, the Trial Court has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest [NBWA] against the petitioner as a charge-sheeted accused in G.R. Case no.115/2014 [earlier, G.R. Case no. 6517/2009].

2. A First Information Report [FIR] was lodged before the Officer In-Charge, Palashbari Police Station on 29.07.2009 by a Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Palashbari Police Station in reference to General Diary Entry no. 827 dated 28.07.2009. As per the FIR, basing on an information received from a source to the effect that narcotic substances were being carried by a truck bearing registration no. NL-08/A-0970 [‘the subject-vehicle’, for short] and proceeding towards Guwahati, the subject-vehicle was intercepted at an area near Barkuchi. On a search being made inside the subject-vehicle, in presence of witnesses, 73 nos. of gunny bags were found under bags containing rice and each gunny bag was found containing 4 nos. of cartoons. Each of the cartoons contained 50 nos. of Phensedyl bottles. The Phensedyl bottles were seized. The said FIR was registered as Palashbari Police Station Case no. 169/09 under Sections 468 /471, INDIAN PENAL CODE [IPC].

3. On registration of Palashbari Police Station Case no. 169/2009 and during the course of investigation, the petitioner was arrested. After arrest, the petitioner was forwarded to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup at Amingaon. On being so produced, he was remanded to custody.

Subsequently, the petitioner was allowed to go on bail.

4. It transpires that after completing investigation, the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of the case submitted a charge-sheet being Charge-Sheet no. 112/2010 on 31.05.2010 finding sufficient incriminating materials against six nos. of accused persons including the petitioner, for committing offences under Sections 468 /471/34, IPC.

5. The petitioner has averred that he is a permanent inhabitant of Tripura and after being released on bail, he went back to his native place at Tripura. The petitioner has further asserted that after filing of the Charge-Sheet on 31.05.2010, no summons was received by him or his family from the Trial Court. Subsequent to submission of the Charge-Sheet, the petitioner also went to Kerala to earn his livelihood and he stayed in the State of Kerala for a number of years.

6. From the Order dated 23.02.2023 passed by the Trial Court, it can be noticed that summons were issued to six nos. of charge-sheeted accused persons but till that date, all the six charge-sheeted accused persons so summoned, did not appear before the Trial Court. A Report was submitted to the effect that one of the charge-sheeted accused persons, namely, Ajit Singh was dead. Summons issued to other four accused persons, namely, [i] Narendra Singh, [ii] Avatar Singh, [iii] Sukdev Singh, and [iv] Gurudev Singh, returned with a Report of non-traceability. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, the Trial Court had recorded that summons issued to him did not return. As the records reflected that the summons had continuously been issued to the petitioner from the date of being charge-sheeted, without any fruitful result, the Trial Court taking note of the fact of long pendency of the case at the stage of appearance, deemed it justified to issue proclamation and attachment [P&A] alo