Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24968 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3631 of 2025 Applicant :- Shekhar @ Shekhar Sandal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Homes Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Salman Abbas,Shambhavi Puri,Syd Shaheen Fatma,Syed Waqar Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Salman Abbas, learned counsel for the applicant/petitioner as well as learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State. 2. By means of the present 528 BNSS petition the petitioner has challenged order dated 15.2.2025 whereby non bailable warrants has been issued by Additional Court No.Vth, Lucknow in case No.2610 of 2016, under Section 138 NI Act, P.S. Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow. 3. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner is an accused in aforesaid case under Section 138 of N.I.Act at P.S. Vikas Nagar, District Lucknow in which the petitioner had approached this Court previously by filing an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.No.8622 of 2017 and this Court by means of order dated 22.12.2017 had referred the matter before the arbitration centre and in the said order it was clearly provided that till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in Criminal Complaint Case No.1729 of 2016, under Section 138 of N.I.Act. Subsequently by means of order dated 13.3.2018 the petition was dismissed for want of prosecution and the interim order was discharged. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at the outset, submits that non bailable warrants have been issued by the trial court without resorting to any other mode of summoning the petitioner and consequently the said order should be set aside. He has further stated that the petitioner is ready and willing to appear before the trial court. From the aforesaid statement it was clearly borne out that he has not appeared before the trial court and has assailed the proceedings in the present petition only on the ground that prior to issuing non bailable warrants no other process have been issued to summon the petitioner. 5. From the records the arguments are clearly incorrect in as much as the proceedings were well within the knowledge of the petitioner as he had previously moved application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before this Court in case No.8622 of 2017 where the matter was referred for settlement through arbitration and as an interim measure it was provided that no coercive action shall be taken against him till the next date of listing. 6. The petitioner was fully aware that certain coercive action action must have been taken against him for which he obtained interim orders from this Court. Now the petitioner came up with a new argument that he is ready to put in appearance and file his bond of appearance and merely because he has not appeared on few dates non bailable warrants have been issued. The said argument is clearly contrary to the stand taken by the petitioner that he has not appeared in the proceedings till date and he is willing to participate in the said proceedings. 7. Apart from the above, we find that no order sheet has been annexed by the petitioner which could indicate as to whether any coercive method has been resorted to by the trial court to summon the petitioner. We do not appreciate the conduct of learned counsel for the petitioner in as much as this Court was tried to be misled into believing that without issuing any process straightaway non bailable warrants have been issued. The petition itself indicates that at the behest of the petitioner the matter was referred for arbitration and further it was directed that no coercive action shall be taken against him clearly some coercive action action must have been issued by the trial court so at to necessitate passing of the interim order dated 22.12.2010. Consequently in case the petitioner has put in appearance and filed bond of appearance and participated in the proceedings before the trial court, the trial court would not have issued non bailable warrants. 8. Accordingly, the petition is devoid of merits and is accordingly dismissed. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 1.5.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench