Allahabad High Court

RAVIversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Decided: 8 September 2026
Bench: SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI

Holding

The court stayed the execution of the non‑bailable warrant, finding its issuance without prior summons and bailable warrant to be procedurally improper.

Summary

The applicant filed an application under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking to quash a non‑bailable warrant (NBW) issued in a criminal case involving offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act. The applicant contended that he was already on bail when the NBW was issued and that the court had not served a summon or a bailable warrant, contrary to established law that NBWs are a last resort. The opposite party opposed the application. The High Court held that the procedural requirements were not satisfied and, therefore, stayed the execution of the NBW for three weeks, directing that if the applicant appears before the lower court and applies for bail or recall of the NBW, the matter will be decided in line with relevant Supreme Court precedents. The application was disposed with a conditional stay, not an outright quash.

Issues considered

Whether a non‑bailable warrant can be validly issued against a person who is already on bail.
Whether the issuance of a non‑bailable warrant without prior service of a summon and a bailable warrant violates procedural law.
Whether the High Court can stay the execution of a non‑bailable warrant under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita.

Legislation cited

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 528
Indian Penal Code — s. 363, 366, 376
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act — s. 3, 4

Subjects

personal liberty
non‑bailable warrant
bail
procedural fairness
Section 528
criminal procedure
POCSO
stay of execution

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 37672 of 2026

Ravi
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of Up And 3 Others
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Naveen Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 77
HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J.

Sri Naveen Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Abhishek
Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State are present.

The present application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha
Sanhita, 2023 has been filed to quash the order dated 6.8.2026 passed in
Session Trial No. 832 of 2017, arising out of case crime No. 346 of 2017,
under Sections 363, 366, 376, I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Protection of
Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Govind Nagar, District
Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Special Judge (POCSO
Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 25, Kanpur Nagar, whereby Non
Bailable Warrant has been issued against the applicant.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was on bail at
the time of issuing of 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 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. has opposed the application.

This is a case related to personal liberty of the present applicant, due to this
reason, hearing of opposite party No. 2 is dispensed with.

Considering submissions of learned counsel and perusing record, the instant
application under Section 528 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is
NA528 No. 37672 of 2026
2

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 against
applicant shall be kept in abeyance.

September 9, 2026
T. Sinha
(Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.)

Digitally signed by :-
TRIPTI SINHA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…