Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010279702025 2025:GAU-AS:17514 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1602/2025 SARBAN KR MECH S/O ARUN MECH, R/O MODERKHAT GAON, P.O. TINIALI NAGAON, P.S. BORDUMSA, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM. VERSUS MINTU BHUYAN S/O LT. NITYANANDA BHUYAN, R/O NO. 3 BORHOLLONG BHUYAN GAON, P.O. HOLLONG GUTIBARI, P.S. BORDUMSA, DIST. TINSUKIA, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K GOGOI, MS. P BORAH Advocate for the Respondent : , BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MANISH CHOUDHURY ORDER 17.12.2025 Heard Ms. P. Bora, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is facing trial in a complaint case, N.I. Case no. 02/2022, N.I. Case no. 02/2022, presently pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Tinsukia [‘the Trial Court’, for short]. The complaint case has been instituted under Section 138 of the Page No.# 2/3 Negotiable Instrument [N.I.] Act, 1881, as amended, on the ground that a cheque issued for a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- from a bank account maintained by the petitioner in favour of the complainant stood disohoured due to insufficiency of fund. After taking cognizance, the Trial Court issued process against the petitioner for his appearance. It is stated that on 04.11.2022, the petitioner appeared before the Trial Court and sought for his release on bail. The Trial Court allowed the petitioner to go on P.R. Bond of Rs. 8,000/-, in default, Jail Hajot. The petitioner was also asked to pay a cost of Rs. 500/- due to his non-appearance on previous dates which resulted in delayed proceeding. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that during the subsequent period from 07.09.2023, the petitioner could not appear before the Trial Court because he had to undergo job training in Gujarat. However, on and from 13.02.2024, no steps on behalf of the petitioner were taken in N.I. Case no. 02/2022. As a result, the Trial Court ordered for issuance of Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest [NBWA] against the petitioner on 28.03.2024. Subsequently on 10.10.2025, when a report was submitted to the effect that the NBWA had returned without execution due to the reason that the accused could not be found, the Trial Court issued ordered for Proclamation & Attachment [P&A]. 4. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that though during the earlier period the petitioner could not be present before the Trial Court due to reasons beyond his control, he would appear regularly in the trial henceforth without any default. The petitioner has submitted that he has an apprehension that due to issuance of NBWA, he might be arrested in the interregnum. The petitioner has, thus, sought for quashing/recall of the order of P&A as well as the NBWA issued against him. 5. The condition precedent for initiation of an action for issuance of proclamation is prior issuance of warrant of arrest by the concerned Court. Before a proclamation is issued, the Court should have reasons to believe [whether after taking evidence or not], that the person against whom warrant was issued has absconded or is concealing himself and that the warrant cannot be executed. The satisfaction could be subjective but it cannot be without any material basis. Only after recording such satisfaction, the Court can direct publication of a Page No.# 3/3 written proclamation requiring such person to appear at a specified place within a specified period. 6. The Order dated 10.10.2025 whereby the Trial Court has ordered for Proclamation & Attachment did not record that it had reached a satisfaction that the accused had absconded or he was concealing himself. The Order dated 10.10.2025 is, therefore, set aside. 7. In so far as issuance of NBWA is concerned, the Court is to be guided by the parameters set forth in Section 90 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita [BNSS], 2023. As the petitioner herein has undertaken that he would regularly appear before the Trial Court henceforth and would not make any default, this Court is of the considered view that if the petitioner is allowed to appear before the Trial Court within a period of 15 [fifteen] days from today by keeping the NBWA in abeyance, the same would facilitate an expeditious conclusion of the trial under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. The complaint has been lodged by the complainant in N.I. Case primarily for recovery of the cheque amount. The appearance of the petitioner at an early date would facilitate such process. It is, therefore, ordered that the NBWA issued against the petitioner shall remain in abeyance for a period of 15 [fifteen] days from today by which period the petitioner shall submit himself to the jurisdiction of the Trial Court. It is further observed that if the petitioner, upon his appearance before the Trial Court within 15 [fifteen] days from today, submits any application seeking his release on bail, the Trial Court shall consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law. 8. This order disposes of the criminal petition. JUDGE Comparing Assistant