Judicial discretion must inform the issuance of non-bailable warrants, demanding satisfaction of circumstances rather than mechanical application of law.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. MMO No. : 1059 of 2024 Reserved on : 0 4 ^th June, 2025 Decided on : 29 ^th August, 202 5 Dheeraj Kumar …Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.

Whether approved for reporting? ¹ Yes For the petitioner : Mr. Ajay Kochhar, Senior Advocate with Mr. Varun Chauhan, Advocate.

For the Crespondent : Mr. Tejasvi Sharma, Additional Advocate General.

Virender Singh, Judge g Petitioner Dheeraj Kumar has filed the present ipetition, under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNSS ’), for quashing and setting aside the order dated 6.8.2024, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.V, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as the learned trial Court’), with a prayer to issue necessary direction to the learned trial Court, in case Police Challan No.135/2024, arising out of FIR No.43 of 2022, dated

1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.

31.03.2022, registered, under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the IPC’) with Police Station Sadar, Shimla, H.P.

2. The factual position giving rise to the filing of the present petition, as borne out frofm the pleadings, may be summed up, as under:-

2.1. Petitioner was ntamed as accused in FIR No.43 of 2022, dated 31.03.2022, registered, under Section 306 IPC with Police Station Sadar, Shimla, H.P. It is his further case that he was released on bail, by this Court, vide order dated 15.06.2022, passed in Cr.MP (M) No.924 ohf 2022. Thereafter, the police has completed the ginvestigation and submitted the charge-sheet before the ilearned trial Court.

2.2. Subsequently, notices were issued against the petitioner and he has put appearance before the learned trial Court. Thereafter, copy of the charge-sheet was supplied to him and the case was fixed for 6.8.2024, for checking of the copies.

2.3. Petitioner has further pleaded that he is working in the High Court and he has intimated his counsel to move appropriate application, seeking exemption from personal appearance, before the learned trial Court, however, despite specific instructions to move application for exemption, the counsel for the petitioner not only failed to file requisite applicfation, but, also failed to put appearance. Due to his non-appearance, the learned trial Court has tissued non-bailable warrants against the petitioner, by cancelling his personal and surety bonds.

2.4. It is the further case of the petitioner that before the non-bailable warrants could be served, the phetitioner appeared before the learned trial Court by gmoving application under Section 72 (2) read with Section i480 of the BNSS , for cancellation and recalling of the non-

bailable warrants, issued vide order dated 06.08.2024. However, the learned trial Court has not entertained the application and directed the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court before entertaining the application, on the ground that condition No.2, imposed by this Court, while deciding Cr.MP(M) No.924 of 2022, has been violated.

2.5. The said order of the learned trial Court has been assailed by the petitioner before this Court, on the ground that the procedure, being adopted by the learned trial Court, is against the basic provisions of law and tenets of criminal law. f

2.6. It has been contended on behalf of the petitioner that his absencet, before the learned trial Court, was neither intentional nor willful, but, due to the reasons as submitted as above.

3. Along with the present petition, an application, bearing Cr.MP No. 4395 of 2024, has also been filed, in whhich, the following order has been passed on g28.10.2024:-

i Till the next date of hearing, the operation of H the or