HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 11396 of 2025 Court No. - 88 HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. 2. The present petition has been filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India assailing the order dated 29.08.2025 passed by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Kushinagar at Padrauna in Sessions Trial No. 393 of 2025, titled Sarkar v. Naim, arising out of Case Crime No. 435 of 2024, under Sections 376(1) and 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar. By the said order, the learned trial Court has issued bailable warrants of Rs. 10,000/- against the sureties and has further directed recovery of the surety amount. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the local police, under the garb of execution of the impugned order, has been conducting repeated raids at the petitioner's premises, which is contrary to law. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. contends that the order impugned has been passed under Section 491 of the B.N.S.S., which is an appealable order, and an efficacious statutory remedy is available to the petitioner under Section 495 B.N.S.S. It is, therefore, submitted that the present petition is not maintainable and is premature at this stage. 5. Upon due consideration of the submissions advanced and perusal of the material on record, it transpires that the petitioner has not annexed any document or material evidence to substantiate his argument. From the record, it further appears that the accused, for whom the petitioner stood as surety, has absconded and is stated to have left the country. Consequently, the proceedings under Section 491 B.N.S.S. have rightly been initiated against the sureties. 6. In view of the above, and having regard to the availability of an alternative statutory remedy, this Court finds no good ground to interfere in Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Rajeev Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Respondent(s) : Wajir And Another .....Petitioner(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Respondent(s) exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 7. Accordingly, the petition, being premature and devoid of merits, stands dismissed. October 10, 2025 Shafique A227 No. 11396 of 2025 2 (Vinod Diwakar,J.) Digitally signed by :- SAFIKUR RAHAMAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad