The court ruled the provisions under Section 528 of the BNSS allow for the quashing of non-bailable warrants when justifiable circumstances are presented.

ORAL ORDER

1. RULE. Learned APP waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent-State.

2. By way of this application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), the applicant has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 02.06.2025 passed under Exhibit 34 in ACB Case No.1 of 2020 by the learned Sessions Court, Halol, quashing and setting aside of the order dated 09.06.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Halol and to restore the bail order dated 13.06.2014 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Panchmahals in Criminal Misc. Application No.467 of 2014.

3. Learned advocate for the applicant submits that the applicant has nothing to do with the offence and has been falsely implicated. It is submitted that a non-bailable warrant is issued to secure the presence of the accused during trial, and in the present case, the petitioner appeared before the learned trial Court through his advocate on the very same day as soon as he became aware of the issuance of the non-bailable warrant. It is further submitted that an oral request was made on 17.05.2025 to adjourn the matter to

03.06.2025, and the petitioner and his advocate were under that impression. Therefore, it is prayed that the application may be allowed.

4. Learned APP has opposed the grant of application and submitted that the trial Court has not committed any error in issuing the non-bailable warrant. Therefore, the application may be dismissed.

5. Having heard the learned advocates for both sides and upon considering the documents on record, it appears that the petitioner, after being arrested, preferred a regular bail application before the trial Court, which came to be rejected. Thereafter, the petitioner preferred an application for default bail before the learned Sessions Court, Panchmahals, which came to be allowed. On 02.06.2025, a non-bailable warrant came to be issued as the petitioner did not appear before the trial Court on the date of hearing, and consequently, the petitioner was arrested. It is submitted that the petitioner could not remain present before the trial Court as he had to attend the funeral of a close relative. The applicant now assures this Court that he will regularly attend the court proceedings without fail.

6. In view of the above, and considering the fact that the applicant is ready to regularly attend the court proceedings whenever the case is listed, the application deserves consideration.

7. In the aforesaid backdrop, it is necessary to consider whether the power conferred by the High Court under Section 528 of BNSS / 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is warranted. It is true that the powers under Section 528 of BNSS /482 Cr.P.C are very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise.

8. In the result, the application is allowed. The impugned order dated 02.06.2025 passed under Exhibit 34 in ACB Case No.1 of 2020 by the learned Sessions Court, Halol and the order dated 09.06.2025 passed by the learned Sessions Court, Halol are hereby quashed and set aside and the appellant is ordered to be released on regular bail on executing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;

(a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty;

(b) not act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution & shall not obstruct or hamper the police investigation and shall not to play mischief with the evidence collected or yet to be collected by the police;

(c) surrender pa