IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.2003 of 2026 Buda @ Rabinarayan Das …. Petitioner(s) Mr. Jnyanananda Panda, Adv. -versus- State of Odisha …. Opposite Party(s) Ms. Gayatri Patra, ASC CORAM: HON’BLE DR.JUSTICE SANJEEB K PANIGRAHI Order No. 01. ORDER 29.06.2026 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid arrangement. 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 3. The Petitioner has filed the present CRLMC challenging the order dated 02.11.2024 passed by the learned A.S.J. (W), Bhawanipatna in C.T. Case No.35 of 2016 (Sessions), whereby a Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest (NBW) has been issued against him. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner was granted bail vide order dated 09.05.2016 and had been regularly appearing before the learned trial Court on every date fixed for trial. It is further submitted that the Petitioner is a person with 100% permanent Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 29-Jun-2026 18:36:51 Signature Not Verified disability, having suffered amputation of both legs below the waist and is presently residing at Cuttack. Owing to his severe physical disability and the considerable distance of nearly 450 kilometres between Cuttack and Bhawanipatna, it is extremely difficult for him to remain physically present before the trial Court on every date. It is further contended that due to a communication gap between the Petitioner and his learned counsel, no appropriate step could be taken on the date when the case was called. Nevertheless, the learned trial Court, without taking into consideration the Petitioner's peculiar circumstances, his past conduct of regular appearance, and the explanation for his absence, proceeded to issue the Non-Bailable Warrant in a mechanical manner. It is submitted that the impugned order does not disclose any satisfaction that the Petitioner was deliberately evading the process of law or had misused the liberty granted to him while on bail. 5. Having considered the submissions made and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the ends of justice would be served by affording the Petitioner an opportunity to explain his absence before the learned trial Court. Accordingly, it is directed that if the Petitioner surrenders before the learned A.S.J. (W), Bhawanipatna in C.T. Case No.35 of 2016 (Sessions) within a period of two weeks from Digitally Signed Signed by: SIPUN BEHERA Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA, CUTTACK Date: 29-Jun-2026 18:36:51 Signature Not Verified today and files an appropriate application for recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest along with an application explaining his absence, the learned trial Court shall consider and dispose of the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. 6. While considering such application, the learned trial Court shall keep in view the Petitioner's 100% permanent disability, his previous conduct of regular appearance after being enlarged on bail, the explanation offered for his absence on the date fixed and the settled principle that issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant is a coercive measure to be resorted to only when the Court is satisfied that the accused is intentionally avoiding the process of law or that such a course is otherwise indispensable for securing his presence. If the learned trial Court finds the explanation to be bona fide, the application for recall of the Non-Bailable Warrant shall be considered sympathetically and in accordance with law. 7. Accordingly, the CRLMC stands disposed of. 8. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Dr. Sanjeeb K Panigrahi) Judge Sipun ORISSA, CUTTACK