Non-Bailable Warrants should be issued cautiously as a last resort to protect personal liberty, and the physical presence of the accused is not mandatory for the trial court to consider an application for the recall of such warrants.

ORAL ORDER

1. Leave to delete. Amendment shall be carried out forthwith.

2. The present application has been filed challenging the order passed by the learned trial Court issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant against the present applicant.

3. Heard the learned advocate Mr. O.I.Pathan appearing for the applicant and the learned APP Mr. Ronak Raval for the respondent.

4. Learned advocate Mr. Pathan submits that an application was earlier preferred seeking cancellation of the Non- Bailable Warrant and exemption from personal appearance before the learned trial Court. The said application came to be rejected, which was subsequently challenged before this Court by way of Special Criminal Application No.13528 of 2025. It is further submitted that the said application was withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh application for cancellation of the Non-Bailable Warrant, which was permitted subject to the appearance of the petitioner. Learned advocate Mr. Pathan submits that the applicant is willing to appear through video conferencing, as he apprehends that, in the event of physical appearance, he may be taken into custody. It is submitted that the applicant shall file an appropriate application before the learned trial Court seeking permission to appear through video conferencing.

3.Per contra, learned APP Mr. Raval submits that the earlier application preferred by the applicant challenging the issuance of the Non-Bailable Warrant was withdrawn with a liberty to file a fresh application before the concerned Court for its cancellation, subject to the applicant’s appearance. In view of the said condition, it is submitted that the learned trial Court has committed no error in rejecting the application in the absence of the applicant’s presence.

4.Having considered the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties, it emerges that an application for cancellation of the Non-Bailable Warrant was earlier preferred by the applicant, which came to be rejected by the learned trial Court vide order dated 30.07.2025 below Exhibit 50. The said order was challenged by the applicant by way of Special Criminal Application No.13528 of 2025 however, the same came to be withdrawn permitting the applicant to file a fresh application for cancellation of the Non-Bailable Warrant, subject to his appearance before the concerned Court. On perusal of the material on record it emerges that the applicant is arraigned as an accused in FIR being I-C.R. No.10 of 2019 registered with Antarsuba Police Station, Kheda, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, and the said case is presently pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Kapadvanj. The applicant was arrested during the course of investigation and was subsequently released on bail by the competent Court. It is the case of the applicant that on the date fixed for hearing, his mother was hospitalized and, therefore, he was required to attend to her medical needs, on account of which he sought exemption from personal appearance and permission to appear through virtual mode. It is further stated that due to cumulative factors such as financial constraints, mental distress, and lack of proper legal guidance, the applicant failed to remain present before the Court for a considerable period, resulting in issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant. In the subsequent application seeking cancellation of the Non-Bailable Warrant, the applicant undertook to remain present on all future dates