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)(Mad) 39301

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
Classic Enterprize Prop. P. Praveenkumar – Appellant
Versus
Sam Tourist Prop. M.R. Narasimhamurthy – Respondent
Crl.OP.(MD)No.6396 of 2026|STC.No.917 of 2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.R.Mohanasundaram
For the Respondents: Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Government Pleader

NBW execution against outstation accused via Section 80 BNSS by jurisdictional police.

Headnote:The petition under Section 528 of the BNSS Act seeks direction to execute a non-bailable warrant (NBW) dated 04.02.2025 issued against accused in STC.No.917 of 2024 pending before Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy. Accused reside in Bangalore, outside the local police jurisdiction. Court finds NBW unexecuted due to jurisdictional limits and directs invocation of Section 80 BNSS for execution through appropriate police. Issue framed: Whether trial court can direct execution of NBW against outstation accused. Ratio: Section 80 BNSS enables execution of warrants by jurisdictional police where accused resides; petitioners must file memo specifying such police for trial court to pass orders. Criminal Original Petition disposed of with directions to trial court.

Table of Content
1. petition seeks nbw execution direction. (Para 1 , 2)
2. accused in bangalore; invoke s.80 bnss. (Para 3)
3. direct memo filing for jurisdictional police. (Para 4 , 5)
4. petition disposed with observations. (Para 6)

ORDER

The present application has been filed by the defacto-complainants in STC.No.917 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Trichy, seeking a direction to execute the Non-Bailable Warrant dated 04.02.2025 issued as against the accused persons.

2. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, even though a non-bailable warrant (NBW) was issued against the accused persons on 04.02.2025, the same has not been executed by the 4th respondent so far.

3. According to the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 4th respondent, the accused persons are residing in Bangalore, and therefore the 4th respondent is not in a position to execute the warrant. He further submits that Section 80 of the BNSS may be invoked for execution of the warrant through the concerned jurisdictional police.

4. Heard the learned Counsels appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5. A perusal of the records reveals that the accused persons are residing in Bangalore. The petitioners are directed to file a memo before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. IV, Tiruchirappalli, indicating the jurisdictional police within whose limits the accused persons are residing. Upon receipt of such memo, the concerned trial court is directed to invoke Section 80 of the BNSS and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

6. With the above observations, this Criminal original Petition stands disposed of. 01.04.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No gvn R.VIJAYAKUMAR , J.

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 Back to top