THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA WRIT PETITION NO.7314 OF 2025

ORDER:

(per Hon’ble Sri Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda)

This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking the following relief:

“to issue an order direction or a writ in the nature of a certiorari mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the 1strespondent to permit the petitioner to appear through video conference and not to insist on her personal appearance before learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate recall for of the BW/NBWs issued against the petitioner for personal appearance and for sureties and to direct the 2^nd respondent not to cause the arrest of the petitioner without prior leave of this Court, report compliance before this Court and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case and further prayed that in order to prevent a miscarriage of justice all the cases that pending against the petitioner before the 1^st Respondent be clubbed together.”

2. Mrs.Eunice Chawngthu, petitioner, though she has engaged Sri B.Krupanandam, Advocate to represent her case, but as a party-in-person, she herself made submissions virtually.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate has issued two bailable and three non-bailable Warrants against petitioner for non appearance and for non-production of sureties under Section 448, 427 and 506 IPC and 533, 506 and 509 IPC. She contended that all the cases registered are frivolous in nature and none of which are heinous in nature or of any national importance.

4. On 28.02.2025 (AN), the Telangana Police Department represented by the respondent No.2 and the Narsingi Police Station, sent as many as 10 to 20 police personnel to her residence at Alkapuri Township to specifically execute the Non Bailable Warrant issued by the respondent No.1, in respect of the matters pertaining to the year 2018. She further contended that on 28.02.2025, the petitioner immediately filed a petition under Section 70(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure before respondent No.1 to recall the Bailable and Non-Bailable Warrants issued against petitioner, but the respondent No.1 refused to receive the same by stating that the time to file fresh petitions was over. Even though her counsel waited in Court till 5 P.M. She further contended that again on 01.03.2025 petitioner’s counsel at 10.30 A.M. filed another application under Section 70(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, vide USR Nos.192/ 25, 193/ 25 and 194/ 25. However, the respondent No.1, unlawfully rejected two recall petitions without even assigning SR numbers and thereafter the respondent No.1 rejected the other three recall petitions and insisting her personal appearance to recall the Non Bailable Warrants.

5. The main contention of the petitioner/ party-in-person is that she is unable to attend the Court physically before the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, as she is facing a serious threat to her life and she being a lonely lady from the family and she is only seeking relief in this writ petition to permit her to appear through video-conference before respondent No.1 and direct the respondent No.1 not to insist her personal appearance and recall the Bailable and Non-Bailable Warrants pending against her.

6. Heard. Perused the material on record.

7. During the course of the arguments, the petitioner has placed list of cases which are pending against her before the respondent No.1, which reads as under:

1. CC No.9055/2020, FIR No.103/17 filed under Section 353,506 and 509 of IPC.

2. CC No.578/18 under Section 353 IPC. 3. CC No.696/18 under Section 341, 427.

4. CC No.1310/2019 under Section 427, 448 and 506 of IPC, settled before Lok-adalat on 06.03.2025

5. CC No.1501/2019 under Section 341 and 506 of IPC, settled before Lok-adalat on

21.02.2025.

8. It is pertinent to mentio