SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 17863

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
P. M. Raval, J
Jitendrakumar Talaji Gelot – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
R/SPECIAL CRIMINAL APPLICATION (DIRECTION) NO. 7637 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Maulik M Soni
For the Respondents: Rohan Raval

Courts may cancel non-bailable warrants for non-appearance by imposing conditions such as financial costs and a formal undertaking to ensure future attendance, thereby securing the defendant's trial participation while minimizing unnecessary judicial delays.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 70 - Cancellation of Non-bailable warrant - Petitioner failed to appear before the trial court due to being occupied with other legal proceedings - Court has wide discretion to cancel non-bailable warrants by imposing conditions to ensure the continuity and pace of trial - Balancing the interest of justice with procedural compliance - Mandatory requirement of an undertaking to appear on future dates as a condition for relief. (Para 5)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought the conversion of a non-bailable warrant issued against him in a criminal case into a bailable one, owing to his inability to appear before the trial court on previous occasions due to involvement in other criminal matters. The petitioner argued that he was pursuing legal remedies in other matters, leading to his failure to attend.

Findings of Court:
The court noted that while the non-bailable warrant was issued due to successive absences, the interests of justice and the need to proceed with the trial without further delay outweighed the need for maintaining the non-bailable status of the warrant. The court determined that imposing a monetary penalty and requiring an undertaking to ensure future presence were sufficient measures to address the procedural lapse.

Issues: Whether a non-bailable warrant issued due to the accused's failure to appear before the court can be cancelled or converted into a bailable one on the condition of an undertaking and payment of costs.

Ratio Decidendi: Courts exercise discretion to cancel non-bailable warrants when the accused demonstrates willingness to participate in the trial by furnishing an undertaking and compensating for the delay caused by his absence through the payment of costs, provided such relief does not jeopardize the trial's progression.

Result: Petition partly allowed; non-bailable warrant cancelled subject to conditions.

Table of Content
1. initiation of constitutional proceedings for modification of trial court warrants. (Para 1 , 2)
2. submission of reasons for non-appearance and proposals for conditional compliance. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court discretion in cancelling non-bailable warrants subject to strict conditions. (Para 5 , 6)

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred with the prayer to convert the non-bailable warrant dated 19.12.2025 issued under Section 70 of the Code of Criminal Procedure into a bailable warrant. The petitioner challenges the warrant issued against him in Criminal Case No. 447 of 2025.

3. Without entering into the merits of the case, which are not relevant for the purpose of deciding the present petition, learned advocate Mr. Maulik Soni would submit that the petitioner is aged 40 years and is engaged in the business of trading onions, potatoes and garlic under the name and style of Jeet Trading Company. Other two FIRs are also lodged against him, and he was pursuing his legal remedy, and therefore he could not remain present before the concerned trial court on the dates so fixed.

4. Per contra, learned APP Mr. Rohan H. Raval would submit that, in view of the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioner during the arguments, the petitioner is ready and willing to file an undertaking before the learned trial Court. He would further submit that the complaint is private in nature; however, some costs as well as condition may be imposed so that the trial may be conducted without any delay. Considering the same, appropriate orders may be passed.

5. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties and having perused the averments made in the petition and the documents made available along with the petition, it appears that a non-bailable warrant was issued against the present petitioner due to his successive absence. Though learned advocate for the petitioner has fairly submitted that two other FIRs were lodged against him during this period, be that as it may, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is directed to file an undertaking before the trial Court to the effect that he would remain present on every date of hearing unless exempted by the trial Court, and in view of the same, the following order is passed:

(i) The non-bailable warrant issued under Section 70 Cr.P.C. against the present petitioner dated 19.12.2025 is cancelled on condition of depositing costs of ₹5,000 before the trial Court. The petitioner shall remain present before the concerned Court on 6th July, 2026 and shall also undertaking on the same day.

6. In view of above, the present petition is partly allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct service is permitted.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top