Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040010102025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Crl.Petn./128/2025 Bobby Sumnyan Son of Shri Jato Sumnyan, resident of Rajanagar-II, PO and PS Changlang, District Changlang, Arunachal Pradesh and presently serving as Inspector, Diyun Police Station, Changlang District, Arunachal Pradesh. VERSUS The State of AP represented by the PP of AP Advocate for the Petitioner : J Tsering, Logsang Yountan,Techi Topu Advocate for the Respondent : P P of AP, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 23-06-2025 Heard Mr. J. Tsering, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. D. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State of Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This instant application under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 is filed for setting aside and quashing of the Non-Bailable Warrant of Arrest (NBWA for short), issued on 27.05.2025, by the learned Sessions Court, Ziro. Page No.# 2/3 3. The Learned Sessions Court, vide the order dated 27.05.2025, has issued NBWA upon the petitioner on grounds that initially i.e. on 29.01.2025, summon was issued to the petitioner through the Officer-in-Charge of the concerned police station, however, there was no report of service of summons. The learned Sessions Court also had held in the said order that thereafter, on 26.03.2025, Bailable Warrant of Arrest was issued against the petitioner through the jurisdictional police station which was also not executed. However, on 26.05.2025, the petitioner has informed the Registry of the learned Sessions Court, Ziro that he is on his way to attend the Court proceedings. The petitioner, thereafter, informed the Court staff, over phone, that he had not received any summon or warrant and as such he could not appear in the Court. The petitioner, however, without any glaring disobedience had asked for issuing fresh summons for the next date of hearing. The learned Court below, despite issuance of summon and Bailable Warrant of Arrest (BWA for short), had noticed that the petitioner had not appeared on many dates and as such, the learned Court below, was pleased to issue NBWA against the petitioner. 4. Mr. J. Tsering, counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has not committed any wilful disobedience of the summons and the BWA issued by the Court. Due to his course of duties allotted to him, he was at times not at his residence, neither in his office. He, as such, did not receive the summons or the BWA. The counsel submits that had the petitioner received any information about his deposition to be made before the Court, he would have immediately rushed for the same. 5. Mr. Loyi, learned Public Prosecutor for the State entered appearance and does not object to the prayer for setting aside and quashing of the NBWA issued against the petitioner. Page No.# 3/3 6. In view of the submissions made above and considering the fact that the petitioner is a witness in the case where his deposition was required and in view of the fact that he did not receive the summon, BWA, neither the NBWA, this Court allows the petitioner to appear before the learned Court of the Sessions Judge, Ziro Sessions Division on 25.07.2025, i.e. the nest date fixed for the prosecution evidence. If the petitioner, however, fails to appear on the said date, necessary action may be taken, for the ends of justice. 7. Till, 25.07.2025, the NBWA issued against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance and the petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Court of Sessions Judge, Ziro, without fail. 8. Criminal petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant