Vishnu v. State of Uttarakhand

2025:UHC:3378 SL. No. Dat e Office Not es, r epor t s, or der s or pr oceedin gs or dir ect ion s an d Regist r ar 's or der w it h Sign at u r es COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS

C-528 No. 570 of 2025

Hon 'ble Vivek Bh ar t i Sh ar m a, J.

Mr. Gaurav Kandpal alongwith Mr. Rakshit Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶2Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶3This criminal misc. application is filed under Section of B.N.S.S. by the petitioner/accused for quashing of the impugned order dated 05.07.2023 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, whereby the NBW were issued against the present petitioner in Special Sessions Trial No. 05 of 2015, titled as "State vs. Rukhsat and Others" under Section 2 & 3 of U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986.

¶4Learned State counsel would vehemently oppose the prayer made in the petition and would submit that this is the interlocutory order of such kind which can always be addressed by making appropriate application before the Magistrate/trial court concerned.

He would further submit that this is pernicious tendency on the part of the litigants that if non-bailable warrants are issued instead of approaching the trial court concerned for cancellation of non-bailable warrant, they file the petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. and previously under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

¶5To this, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that non-bailable warrants were issued on 05.07.2023 but on that day, he was in jail in another case, however, he fairly concedes that he was released from jail on 19.07.2023 and thereafter, the trial court kept on issuing the non-bailable warrants continuously as reflected from the order sheet since the non-bailable warrants could not be executed.

2025:UHC:3378

¶6Heard, considered and perused the record available on file in view of the submissions made by learned counsel for the respective parties.

¶7This Court is of the view that the present petition for cancellation of the non-bailable warrants before the Hon'ble High Court by invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. is not healthy practice as the same can be cancelled by the trial court, if the application is made by the petitioner.

¶8At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner/accused seeks permission to withdraw the petition with liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of the non-bailable warrants.

¶9Not objected to by learned State counsel.

¶10Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner/accused to move appropriate application for cancellation of the non-bailable warrants. If such application is made by the petitioner/accused within five days, then the trial court concerned is directed to decide the same expeditiously, as per law.

¶11Copy of this order be sent to the trial court concerned by email.

( Vivek Bh ar t i Sh ar m a, J.)

0 2 .0 5 .2 0 2 5 Akash