Allahabad High Court
PANKAJ GUPTAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI
Holding
The court held that the non‑bailable warrant could not be executed and the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC were to be kept in abeyance for three weeks pending the applicant’s appearance and bail application.
Summary
The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking to quash the proceedings of Special Case No. 405 of 2018, which arose from a criminal case under IPC sections 354, 504, 506 and POCSO Act sections 7/8, and to set aside a non‑bailable warrant (NBW) and the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC. The applicant contended that the NBW was issued while he was already on bail and without any prior summons or bailable warrant, contrary to settled law that NBW is a last resort. The court dismissed the relief to quash the entire proceedings as it was not pressed, but directed that if the applicant appears within three weeks and applies for bail or recall of the NBW, the matter will be decided in line with Supreme Court precedents. Consequently, the execution of the NBW and the CrPC proceedings were ordered to remain in abeyance for three weeks or until the applicant appears, whichever is earlier. The application was thus disposed with a conditional stay.
Issues considered
- Whether a non‑bailable warrant can be issued against a person who is already on bail without prior summons or bailable warrant.
- Whether the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC may be stayed pending the applicant's appearance and bail application.
Legislation cited
- Bail and Non‑bailable Warrant (BNSS) — s. 528
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 82, 83
- Indian Penal Code — s. 354, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 7, 8
Subjects
- non‑bailable warrant
- bail
- Section 528 BNSS
- POCSO Act
- CrPC Sections 82 and 83
- stay of proceedings
- Supreme Court precedent
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18931 of 2026
Pankaj Gupta
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Neeraj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.
Court No. - 76
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.
Sri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chhavipal Singh,
learned A.G.A. for the State are present.
The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the
entire proceedings of Special Case No. 405 of 2018, arising out of Case
Crime No. 1254 of 2017, under Sections 354, 504, 506 of IPC and Section
7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bansdih Road, District Ballia as well as
cognizance/summoning order dated 29.10.2018 and the order dated
19.02.2026, whereby N.B.W. has been issued against the applicant and the
proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C., pending in the court of
Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Ballia.
After some argument learned counsel for the applicant does not want to
press the relief of quashing of entire proceedings and the
cognizance/summoning order. Hence, these reliefs are dismissed as not
pressed.
So far as issuance of NBW and the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of
Cr.P.C. are concerned learned counsel for the applicant submits that the
applicant was on bail at the time of issuing non-bailable warrant. It is
further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without satisfying
itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served. It
is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without
considering the position of law. It is settled position of law that N.B.W.
should be issued as a last resort after the litigant fails to respond the
NA528 No. 18931 of 2026
2
notices/summons and bailable warrant. It is further submitted that non-
bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summon and bailable
warrant.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 have
opposed the application.
Considering submissions of learned counsel for the applicants and perusing
record, the instant application is finally disposed of with a direction that in
case applicant appears before the court below within three weeks from today
and applies for bail/recall of non bailable warrant, his application shall be
decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by
the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of
Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs.
C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941.
For a period of three weeks from today or till applicant appears before the
court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant as well
as proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. against applicant shall
be kept in abeyance.
May 7, 2026
MAA/-
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…