( 2025:HHC:2253 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.1220 of 2024 Date of Decision: 08.01.2025 Kashmir Singh …Petitioner Versus State of H.P. & Anr. …..Respondents Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Chaudhary, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Mohinder Sharaick and Mr. H.S. Rawat and Additional Advocates General with Ms. Ranjana Patial, Deputy Advocate General, for respondent No.1/State. None for respondent No.2. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) By way of the present petition, filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), indulgence of this Court has been sought to quash and set aside the Non-Bailable Warrant, issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No.2, Mandi, District Mandi, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’), vide order dated 15.07.2024. 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? ( 2025:HHC:2253 ) 2. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner, who has been arrayed as accused, in the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, titled as Suresh Sharma versus Kashmir Singh, pending before the learned trial Court, the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.PC., were ordered to be initiated against him. 3. On 04.12.2024, while issuing the notice to respondent No.2, petitioner was directed to move appropriate application, before the learned trial Court and till the decision of the application, the learned trial Court was requested not to take any coercive action against the petitioner. 4. Despite considerable period of more than one month, the petitioner has not made any efforts to move the appropriate application before the learned trial Court, as directed by this Court. 5. In such situation, this Court is of the view that the petitioner has no plausible explanation for seeking the relief of quashing the NBW and setting aside the order by virtue of which the proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. were ordered to be initiated. ( 2025:HHC:2253 ) 6. Keeping in view the above facts, there is no occasion for this Court to grant relief to the petitioner, as prayed in the petition. 7. Consequently, the present petition is dismissed, so also, the pending applications, if any. (Virender Singh) Judge January 08, 2025 (subhash)