Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:85956 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18199 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Kishore Pandey And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. Heard Sri Shashi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Moti Lal, learned AGA for the State. 2. In view of the order, which is being proposed to be passed, notices are not being issued to O.P. No. 2. 3. This is an application U/s 528 BNSS for setting a side the order dated 21.04.2025 issuing bailable warrant dated 21.04.2025 passed by ACJM, court no.2, Allahabad in complaint case no. 571 of 2023 (Priyanka Tiwari vs. Himanshu Pandey and Ors), U/s 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, P.S. Shivkuti, District Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no.2, Allahabad. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the proceedings were initiated by the opposite party no.2 who happens to be the wife of Himanshu Pandey, the son of applicant nos. 1 & 2 and the brother of applicant no.3. The grievance of the applicants is that on 21.04.2025, bailable warrants have been issued to the applicants which even in fact could not have been issued particularly in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in transfer petition (Crl.) 856 of 2024 Alisha Berry vs. Neelam Berry decided on 03.01.2025. Reliance has also been placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Kunapareddy alias Nookala Shanka Balaji vs. Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari and another 2016 AIR (SC) 2519 so as to content that the proceedings U/s 12 of D.V. Act are quasi criminal proceedings which do not have any penal consequences except where there is violation or breach of the protection order. Learned counsel further submits that as per instruction that now since bailable warrants have been executed and served the applicant shall put in their appearance before the court below and contest the matter on merits in that regard. 5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that whatever might be once a bailable warrants have been issued, though as it is alleged that it is not as per the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court as noted hereinabove, the applicant may file recall application and the court below shall be directed to decide the same. 6. Considering the submissions so made across the bar as well as the overall the facts and situations, this Court at this juncture is not issue notice to opposite party no.2. However, directing the applicants to prefer a recall application before the court below by 10.07.2025 and on the application seeking for recalling of the order dated 21.04.2025 issuing bailable warrant on the premises that the same ought not to have been done in view of the judgment in the case of Alisha Berry (Supra) and in the case of Kunapareddy alias Nookala Shanka Balaji (Supra). The court below shall decide the said application within a further period of two weeks. 7. Till the decision is taken, no coercive actions shall be taken against the applicants in the the order dated 21.04.2025 issuing bailable warrant dated 21.04.2025 passed by ACJM, court no.2, Allahabad in complaint case no. 571 of 2023 (Priyanka Tiwari vs. Himanshu Pandey and Ors), U/s 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, P.S. Shivkuti, District Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no.2, Allahabad. 8. The protection accorded to the applicant is only available subject to compliance of the terms and conditions and timeline as provided therein and in case of default, the order shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench. Order Date :- 21.5.2025 C. MANI (Vikas Budhwar,J.) Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- CHANDRAMANI VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad