Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010182262026 2026:GAU-AS:12972 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1225/2026 ESO SUWER S/O SIL SUWER, R/O 25, NONGSNING, EAST JAINTIA HILLS, MEGHALAYA, 793200 VERSUS STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P R SARMA, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER 07.09.2026 1. Heard Mr. P.R. Sarma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. R.J. Baruah, learned APP appearing for the State of Assam. 2. By this application filed under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 the petitioner has prayed for setting aside the order dated 07.02.2020 as well as the subsequent orders passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate No. Page No.# 2/3 1, Guwahati, Kamrup (M) in PRC Case No. 168/2018 whereby a non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that after submission of the charge sheet before the learned court the petitioner was released on bail. It is further submitted that the petitioner is a resident of East Jaintia Hills, Meghalaya and although summons followed by a bailable warrant and subsequently a non-bailable warrant of arrest were issued against him the same did not reach the petitioner. Consequently, the petitioner was never aware of the proceedings or of the process issued against him. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further submits that it was only when the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner was forwarded to him through the Director General of Police, Meghalaya that the petitioner came to know about the issuance of the warrant. Accordingly, the learned counsel submits that there was no deliberate intention on the part of the petitioner to avoid appearing before the learned trial court and that his non- appearance was solely due to the fact that he was unaware of the process issued against him. 5. Mr. R. J. Baruah, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State, however, submits that the petitioner should be directed to appear before the learned trial court. He further submits that the learned trial court had initially issued summons to the petitioner followed by a bailable warrant of arrest and thereafter, a non-bailable warrant of arrest. Accordingly, he submits that there is no infirmity in the orders passed by the learned trial court. 6. Upon consideration of the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and more so in view of the fact that the petitioner was residing in an Page No.# 3/3 interior area of East Jaintia Hills, Meghalaya and that the non-bailable warrant of arrest had to be executed through the Director General of Police, Meghalaya, this Court deems it fit to direct the petitioner to appear before the learned trial court, namely, the Court of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Guwahati, Kamrup (M) within a period of 10 days from the date of this order. Thereafter, the petitioner shall appear before the learned trial court on the next date fixed, i.e., 27.11.2026. 7. Until the petitioner appears before the said court within the stipulated period the orders pursuant to which the non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner shall remain in abeyance. However, in the event the petitioner fails to appear before the learned trial court within the stipulated time the orders passed by the learned court below shall automatically revive. 8. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner spells his name differently and may write it either as “Eso Suwer” or “Iso Suwer”. 9. Accordingly, the petitioner is at liberty to describe and write his name as “Eso @ Iso Suwer” while making any application before the learned trial court. 10. The petition stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant