Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010157712025 2025:GAU-AS:9742 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./859/2025 DURLOV DAS ALIAS DURLAV DAS SON OF SRI DHARMESWAR DAS R/O VILL- RUPOTOLI GANAKDOLONI, P.S. BIHPURIA, PIN-784165, DIST. LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:SRI ABHILASH SHARMA S/O SRI ROMEESH SHARMA R/O FATASIL AMBARI P.S. FATASIL AMBARI GUWAHATI-781025 DIST. KAMRUP (M) ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P HAZARIKA, MR. A. GAYAN,MR. P K MUNIR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/4 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY 28/07/2025 Heard Mr. P K Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R J Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State respondent. 2. One Abhilash Sharma as the informant lodged a First Information Report on 23.09.2020 before the Officer-in-Charge of Dhalpur Police Station against the petitioner as the accused alleging theft of four new tires of a Truck bearing registration No. AS-01-JC-9391, which belonged to his brother, Sri Sudhanshu Tiwari. It was inter-alia stated in the FIR that the petitioner was engaged as a driver of the said Truck. On the basis of the said FIR, Bihpuria P.S. Case No. 382/2020 (corresponding G.R. Case No. 2047/2020) was registered on 24.09.2020 for the offences under Sections 420/379, IPC. After investigation, the case resulted in a Charge-Sheet dated 31.01.2022 finding a prima-facie case against the petitioner for commission of offences under Sections 420/379, IPC by him. 3. On submission of charge-sheet, the Trial Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in G.R. Case No. 2047/2020 (PRC No. 883/2022), which arose out of Bihpuria P.S. Case No. 382/2020, initially issued summons vide Order dated 03.09.2022 for appearance of the petitioner and also thereafter. A Report was submitted before the learned Trial Court that summons issued to the petitioner had returned after due service. 4. It was on 05.10.2023, the Trial Court had issued Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest [NBWA] to secure the appearance of the petitioner for the trial taking note of the Report as regards service of the summons. By the subsequent Orders, the learned Trial Court issued Non-Bailable Warrants [NBWAs] of Arrest as the warrants issued earlier were not executed. 5. As per the Report of the Enquiry Officer, the accused was not found in the given address as he was in Arunachal Pradesh at that time. There was an observation that the accused had been absconding to avoid his arrest. The learned Trial Court on 05.06.2025 passed a direction for issue proclamation against the petitioner along with the order for issuing NBWA. 6. Mr. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a driver by Page No.# 3/4 occupation and because of his nature of job, the petitioner does not ordinarily stay at his native place. The summons which was stated to have been served, as per the Report, was served upon the elder brother of the petitioner. But, the petitioner had no knowledge about the summons as he neither received the summons personally nor informed about its receipts by his elder brother. It was only after issuance of the proclamation, the petitioner came to know about the pendency of G.R. Case No. 2047/2020 before the Trial Court. Mr. Munir, learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the trial and there will not be any default on the dates posting of the case for his appearance. The petitioner is, however, under the apprehension that prior to his appearance before the learned Trial Court, the petitioner might be taken into custody by Police for executing the NBWAs. 7. Mr. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam has submitted that the petitioner has been avoiding the service of summons as well as execution of the warrants, thereby, making the petitioner is an absconder. He has, however, submitted that if the petitioner participates in the trial, the same would facilitate an expeditious conclusion of the trial. 8. The petitioner is facing possible charges for the offences under Sections 420 and 379, IPC. The charges are yet to be framed. For an expeditious completion of the trial, the participation of the petitioner as a charge-sheeted accused is necessary. 9. Having considered the facts and circumstances obtaining in the case in its entirety and for the interest of an expeditious conclusion of the trial, this Court is of the considered view that since the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the trial, the Warrants of Arrest issued against the petitioner by the learned Trial Court can be kept in abeyance for a limited time period to facilitate the petitioner to appear before the learned Trial Court within the said time period. 10. It is, therefore, observed that the petitioner shall appear before the learned Trial Court within a period of 2 (two) weeks from today and upon such appearance, if the petitioner prefers any application seeking for his bail, the same shall be considered by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law and on its own merits. For the said period of 2 (two) weeks the warrants of arrest issued against the petitioner shall not be executed and they would remain suspended. 11. It is further observed that in the event of failure on the part of the petitioner to appear before the learned Trial Court within a period of 2 (two) weeks from today, the Warrant of Arrest issued earlier against the petitioner would stand revived. Page No.# 4/4 12. With the above observation and direction, the instant criminal petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant