Bombay High Court
Arvind PrasadversusUnion of India through office of Public Prosecutor
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The order dated 24.04.2026 is quashed because the trial court failed to comply with Section 223(1) of the BNSS, which mandates a hearing before issuing process.
Summary
The petitioner Arvind Prasad challenged an order dated 24.04.2026 issued by the trial court without first granting him a hearing, alleging violation of Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 which requires a hearing before issuing process. The High Court examined whether the trial court had complied with the statutory requirement. Finding prima facie non‑compliance, the Court quashed the impugned order and directed the trial court to provide the petitioner an opportunity of hearing before any process is issued, and to pass a final order within two weeks of that hearing. The Court kept all contentions of both parties open and set a fresh date of 05.10.2026 for the hearing. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed and disposed of in the terms specified.
Issues considered
- Did the trial court violate Section 223(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 by issuing process without a prior hearing?
- Should the order dated 24.04.2026 be quashed on account of non‑compliance with the statutory hearing requirement?
- What procedural directions are appropriate to ensure compliance with Section 223(1)?
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 223(1)
Subjects
- Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 223
- writ petition
- procedural hearing
- quashing order
- criminal appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
32.WP.4086.2026.doc
HARSHADA H. SAWANT
(P.A.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.4086 OF 2026
Arvind Prasad .. Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and Ors. .. Respondents
....................
Ms. Shaista Pathan a/w. Ms. Shubashree Yewale, Advocates i/by
YNA Legal LLP for Petitioner.
None for Respondent No.1.
Mr. Amit Munde, SPP a/w. Mr. Jai Vohra for Respondent No.2.
Ms. Sangeeta E. Phad, APP for Respondent No.3.
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 08, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Ms. Pathan, learned Advocate for Applicant; Mr.
Munde, learned SPP for Respondent No.2 and Ms. Phad, learned APP
for Respondent No.3.
2. Since prima facie non-compliance of Section 223 (1) of
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short ‘BNSS’) is seen
the impugned order dated 24.04.2026 stands quashed and set aside
with a direction to the learned Trial Court to give a hearing to the
Petitioner for taking cognizance before issuing process and pass an
appropriate order in accordance with the provisions of section 223(1)
of the BNSS.
3. All contentions of the Petitioner as well as the prosecution
1 of 2
32.WP.4086.2026.doc
are explicitly kept open. On 05.10.2026 when the next date is there
before Trial Court, without any further or fresh notice being issued to
the Petitioner, the Petitioner shall present himself on that day before
the Trial Court and the Trial Court will give him an opportunity of
hearing before issuing process, and after hearing him on 05.10.2026
shall either pass the order on that day or reserve it or pass it later
thereafter and in any event the order will be passed within two weeks
thereof in accordance with law. All contentions of Petitioner and
Respondent No.2 are expressly kept open.
4. The Petition stands allowed and disposed of in the above
terms.
H. H. SAWANT [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally signed
HARSHADA by HARSHADA
HANUMANT
HANUMANT SAWANT
SAWANT Date: 2026.09.08
15:10:31 +0530
2 of 2
Checking your session…