Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010016552025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./77/2025 SHANKAR TALUKDAR S/O GOHIN TALUKDAR, RESIDENT OF SINGARPARA PS BAIHATA CHARIALI, DIST KAMRUP ASSAM VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY PP ASSAM 2:SRI MAHESWAR RAJBONGSHI S/O LATE LAKHIRAM RAJBONGSHI RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINGARPARA PS BAIHATA CHARIALI DIST KAMRUP ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K KALITA, MR. B. DAS Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER Date : 07.02.2025 1.Heard Mr. B. Das, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Page No.# 2/3 2.This is an application Under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Sri Shankar Talukdar, impugned the order dated 29.11.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M), in P.R Case No. 1127/2024, whereby the Trial Court had issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the present petitioner. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that after receiving summons from the Trial Court, the petitioner engaged a counsel for seeking an adjournment on 29.11.2024 on the ground that he was ill on that day and therefore, was unable to appear before the Trial Court. However, the Trial Court rejected his prayer and issued non-bailable warrant of arrest. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is ready to face the trial, however, as the non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against him, he is apprehending that he may be arrested and detained behind the bars. 5. I have heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor also. On perusal of the impugned order, it appears that while rejecting the prayer for adjournment, the only reason mentioned by the Trial Court is that the offence involved in the case is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions. However, the Trial Court has not discussed anything regarding the cause of absence shown by the petitioner in his adjournment petition. 6. In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that as the petitioner is ready and willing to face the trial, some protection may be afforded to him. 7.In view of the above discussions, this criminal petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner for appearing before the Trial Court on Page No.# 3/3 08.04.2025, i.e. the next date fixed for the appearance of the petitioner in the said case (P.R. case No. 1127/2024). 8. To facilitate his appearance before the Trial Court on the said date, the operation of non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against him by the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup(M) shall remain in-operative till that date. 9. With the above observations, this criminal petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant