Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010171372025 2025:GAU-AS:11215 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./960/2025 MD SAFAR ALI S/O LT. SURAB ALI VILL- KAHIKUCHI P.S. KHETRI DIST. KAMRUP (M), ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REP BY THE PP, ASSAM 2:MISS. TASLIMA BEGUM D/O BADAR ALI VIL- NAKHOLA GRANT P.S. JAGIROAD DIST. MORIGAON ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. N J DUTTA, MR. S UDDIN,MR. A A MONDAL Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER Date : 20.08.2025 Heard Mr. N.J. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R.R. Kaushik, learned Page No.# 2/5 Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. 2. The instant criminal petition under Section 528, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 [BNSS] is preferred to assail an Order dated 23.02.2022 and subsequent and consequentioal Orders passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – cum – Special Judge POCSO, Kamrup [Metro] at Guwahati [‘the Special Court’, for short] in course of the proceedings of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021. 3. By the Order dated 23.02.2022, the learned Special Court had ordered for issuance of Bailable Warrant of Arrest [BWA] to secure the appearance of the petitioner in the proceedings of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021 after recording that summons issued to the petitioner returned unserved as the accused could not be found in the given address. The learned Special Court also observed that no better/alternate address of the petitioner was available in the case record. By the subsequent Orders passed on 22.03.2022, 25.04.2022, 19.05.2022, 13.06.2022, 30.06.2022, 28.07.2022, 30.08.2022, 30.09.2022, 10.11.2022 & 07.12.2022, the learned Special Court ordered for issuance of fresh BWAs. 4. On 27.01.2023, the learned Special Court observed that BWA issued against the petitioner did not return after execution. The learned Special Court had ordered for issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest [NBWA] against the petitioner and also notice to his bailor. In the subsequent Orders on 06.03.2023, 10.04.2023, 18.05.2023, 31.07.2023 and 17.06.2023, the Special Court ordered for issuance of fresh NBWAs against the petitioner. The Court also ordered for publication of Proclamation and Attachment [P&A] orders against the petitioner. 5. The Officer In-Charge of Jagiroad Police Station was also asked, by Order dated 14.09.2023, to appear personally to submit a report regarding execution of P&A against the petitioner. It was observed in the Order dated 10.05.2024 that NBWAs and P&As issued against the petitioner were neither executed nor returned. The Court again ordered for issuance of fresh NBWA and P&A against the petitioner. Finally on 20.09.2024, the Officer In-Charge, Jagiroad Police Station submitted a report before Page No.# 3/5 the Court. It transpires from the Order dated 20.09.2024 of the learned Special Court that there was no report regarding execution of the P&A. The same situation continued on the subsequent dates, on 05.12.2024, 04.03.2025 and 29.05.2025. The situation is on date is that the NBWAs issued against the petitioner have not been executed till date. 6. It has been highlighted on behalf of the petitioner that the case, Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021 stood registered after submission of a charge-sheet, Charge-Sheet no. 65/2021 on 25.07.2021, wherein the Investigating Officer [I.O.] of Khetri Police Station Case no. 29/2021 had reported that there was a prima facie case against the petitioner for committing the offences under Section 4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences [POCSO] Act, 2012 and Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code [IPC]. The case, Khetri Police Station Case no. 29/2021 was instituted on the basis of a First Information Report [FIR] lodged by the wife of the petitioner on 09.02.2021, wherein she alleged that the petitioner as the step-father had committed sexual assault on her five years old daughter. On receipt of the FIR, the case was registered as Khetri Police Station Case no. 29/2021 under Section 354, IPC and Section 4, POCSO Act. During the course of investigation, the accused was arrested and after arrest he was forwarded to the jurisdictional Court. On being so produced on 11.02.2021, he was remanded to custody. Subsequently, he was enlarged on bail on 20.03.2021. 7. It is the contention of the petitioner that in the FIR, the informant wife of the petitioner has clearly mentioned the address of the petitioner at Village – Kahikuchi, Police Station – Khetri. The said fact had also been recorded in the Forwarding Report dated 11.02.2021. It is submitted that at the time of submission of the Charge-sheet, the I.O. had mistakenly mentioned the address of the petitioner at Village – Kahikuchi, Police Station - Jagiroad. As a result of such mistake, the processes [summons as well as the warrants of arrests] issued against the petitioner were directed to the Jagiroad Police Station. At no point of time, the petitioner had been served with the summons. It is further asserted that the warrants of arrests [Bailable as well as Non-Bailable] were never taken to Village – Kahikuchi, Police Station - Khetri for execution. As a Page No.# 4/5 result, the petitioner was unaware about continuation of the proceedings of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021. 8. The provisions of issuance of processes have been laid down in Section 87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure [CrPC], which reads as under :- Issue of warrant in lieu of, or in addition to, summons.- A Court may, in any case in which it is empowered by this Code to issue a summons for the appearance of any person, issue, after recording its reasons in writing, a warrant for his arrest— [a] if, either before the issue of such summons, or after the issue of the same but before the time fixed for his appearance, the Court sees reason to believe that he has absconded or will not obey the summons; or [b] if at such time he fails to appear and the summons is proved to have been duly served in time to admit of his appearing in accordance therewith and no reasonable excuse is offered for such failure. 9. Mr. Dutta, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the proceedings of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021 henceforth by appearing in person before the said Court, thereby, submitting to the jurisdiction of the said Court on the next date of hearing of the case, which is on 26.08.2025. He has further submitted that there will be no default on the part of the petitioner in his appearance henceforth, save and except in exceptional situation. 10. Mr. Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that as the alleged offence was committed in the year 2021, an expeditious conclusion of the trial is in the interest of all the stake holders including the prosecution side, the witnesses and the accused. Since, the petitioner has undertaken to appear before the learned Special Court on the next date of hearing, the same would perhaps facilitate an expeditious conclusion of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021. Page No.# 5/5 11. Having regard to the undertaking made by the petitioner in the afore-stated manner; the projections made on behalf of the petitioner that the processes [summons and the warrants of arrests] were directed towards the Jagiroad Police Station all the time; and in the interest of an expeditious conclusion of the proceedings of Sessions [Special] Case no. 67/2021, this Court is of the view that the NBWAs issued against the petitioner can be kept in abeyance till 26.08.2025 so as to remove the apprehension of the petitioner of being taken into custody in execution of those NBWAs in the interregnum. It is accordingly ordered. 12. As per the undertaking, the petitioner shall appear before the learned Special Court on 26.08.2025, and if upon such appearance, the petitioner prefers an application seeking his release on bail, the learned Special Court shall consider the same in accordance with law; on its own merits and by taking into consideration the facts regarding service/non-service of the processes. 13. This criminal petition is disposed of in the afore-stated terms. JUDGE Comparing Assistant