Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
J.SREENIVAS RAO
Thammisetty Vaasu, S/o. Seenu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Telangana, Rep. By Its Public Prosecutor – Respondent
Key Points: - The Magistrate must ordinarily issue summons before any NBW and must record cogent reasons for issuing an NBW at the initial stage if necessary (!) (!) (!) . - Mechanical issuance of NBWs without exhausting lesser coercive measures and without judicial reasoning violates procedural law and Article 21 (!) (!) . - In this case, the NBW issued at the cognizance stage was set aside, and the Magistrate was directed to issue summons and proceed in accordance with law (!) (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the criminal petition and context. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments presented by the petitioner and the prosecution. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis regarding the issuance of non-bailable warrants. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. legal reasoning based on judicial principles and case law. (Para 11) |
| 5. final order and directive to the magistrate. (Para 12) |
ORDER :
J. SREENIVAS RAO, J.
1. This Criminal Petition has been filed aggrieved by the orders dated 12.11.2025 passed in C.C.No.9947 of 2024 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad in issuing fresh Non-Bailable Warrant against accused No.3.
2. Heard Mr. L. Anand, learned counsel representing Mr. P. Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Jithendar Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent No.1. Notice in respect of respondent No.2/de facto complainant is dispensed with on the ground that the petitioner has questioned the NBWs issued by the learned Magistrate.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an accused No.3 in C.C.No.9947 of 2024 on the file of XV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, regist
A Magistrate must issue summons before a Non-Bailable Warrant, and NBWs cannot be issued without judicial reasoning; mechanical issuance violates procedural law.
Court must record reasons for issuing non-bailable warrant; summons should be issued first unless evidence shows the accused is absconding or non-compliant.
Non-bailable warrants cannot be issued in a routine manner; courts must ensure specific, reasoned justification for their necessity to protect individual liberties.
Non-bailable warrants must not be issued routinely and require specific judicial justification to protect individual liberties as mandated by Article 21.
Non-bailable warrants cannot be issued routinely; courts must provide adequate reasoning and evidence to justify such action, ensuring individual liberty is not curtailed without necessity.
Non-bailable warrants cannot be issued in a routine manner and must be supported by specific reasons to protect individual liberties under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.
Non-bailable warrants should not be issued routinely and must be justified with specific reasons, emphasizing the balance between individual rights and public interest.
Issuance of Non-Bailable Warrants requires specific justifications and must not occur routinely; individual liberty should be prioritized unless necessitated by compelling circumstances.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
