‘Absence of a day not enough ground’: HC sets aside non-bailable warrant issued against accused in NDPS case

As per details, the petitioner in the case, one Major Singh, had been arrested in a NDPS case on July 15, 2018, that had been registered at Mehta Police Station, Amritsar. The police has alleged that they have recovered around 15 grams of heroin from Major Singh’s possession, which is non-commercial in nature.

As per the petitioner, he had been granted regular bail on September 27, 2018 and had been regularly appearing before the trial court since then. The charges were framed against him on August 30, 2019. On October 7, 2022, the petitioner appeared before the trial court and the prosecution witnesses were summoned for December 20, 2022. However, on December 20, he could not appear in court as he was not well. The accused stated that he had given an intimation of the same to his counsel and had asked him to file an application for exemption, which somehow was not filed. The trial court subsequently took notice of the accused’s absence and forfeited his bail bonds and surety bonds and issued non bailable warrants against him.

The counsel for petitioner, Balbir Singh Jaswal, argued that non-bailable warrants of arrest have been issued in a mechanical manner therefore, the impugned orders are passed in complete violation of the procedures prescribed under the statute.

Hearing the matter, the high court bench of Justice Harpreet Singh Brar said, “Only on the ground of absence on one date, the trial court instead of issuing bailable warrants, proceeded directly to issue non-bailable warrants. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the order was passed even without assigning any reasons or recording satisfaction that the petitioner is evading his arrest. This court finds that to draw a conclusion that the accused is evading his arrest there must exist reasonable grounds and the court is required to record its satisfaction that the presence of the accused cannot be secured by summons or bailable warrants and there are valid grounds available on record to presume that the accused is willfully evading his arrest.”

“…the courts cannot issue non-bailable warrants in a routine manner without following the drill prescribed under the code. The court is required to record its satisfaction on the basis of material available on record and atleast assign reasons for concluding that the accused is willfully evading his arrest and the warrants cannot be executed. The non-bailable warrants are only to be issued after exhausting the other methods of securing the presence of the accused,” said the high court Bench.

“Mere absence of the accused on one date before the trial court in itself is not sufficient to conclude that he is evading arrest and cannot be the sole ground for issuance of non-bailable warrants. The courts can most certainly take into consideration the conduct of the accused if he is impeding the progress of the trial and is on earlier occasion he was declared a proclaimed offender and on account of his continuous absence from the trial, the trial has been considerably protracted. His past behaviour is relevant for the purpose of recording satisfaction under the relevant provisions of the code”, asserted Justice Brar.

The High Court, thus, proceeded to set aside the order passed by the trial court and directed the petitioner to appear before the trial court on or before July 3, 2023, and on his doing so the trial court shall admit him to bail on furnishing of fresh bail bonds.