Page No.# 1/3 GAHC010188892026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./1227/2026 MD JABBAR ALI S/O LATE AHED ALI, R/O VILLAGE KUPATIMARI, P.O. P.S. BHURAGAON, DISTRICT MORIGAON, ASSAM, PIN-782127. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PP, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. KHAIRUL ISLAM, J S AHMED,M W AHMED Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN ORDER Date : 07.09.2026 Heard Mr. J. S. Ahmed, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam. 2. By this application filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside of orders dated 29.01.2026, as well Page No.# 2/3 as the subsequent orders by which non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation and attachment were issued against the petitioner by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Sivasagar in PRC Case No. 684/2019. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case relates to a period before the advent of the Covid and that during the subsistence of the Covid, the petitioner could not appear before the Court and that thereafter, the petitioner appeared before the Trial Court on 16.12.2020 through his advocate and showed his cause of absence. 3. The learned counsel further submits that the residence of the petitioner was destroyed and that the petitioner had to shift to some other place and the summons and the bailable warrant of arrest could not be served upon the petitioner because he was no longer there in the earlier address. He submits that lately, the police informed him and served him the copy of the NBWA issued against him. The learned counsel further submits that there is every intention on the part of the petitioner to appear and contest the case and as such, he submits that an opportunity be given to him to appear before the Court and contest his case. 4. Mr. R. J. Baruah, the learned counsel for the State however, submits that there is no infirmity in the orders of the Trial Court inasmuch as, first summons were issued then bailable warrant of arrest and then only non-bailable warrant of arrest were issued and thereafter, proclamation and attachment. He submits that only when proclamation and attachment was issued against the petitioner, the petitioner came before this court and earlier he never appeared. 5. Upon consideration of the submissions made by the learned counsels , Page No.# 3/3 more so in view of the fact, that it is a long pending case and on a number of occasions steps were taken by the Trial Court for his appearance before the same but the petitioner had not appeared but now he submits that he will without fail appear before the Trial Court, this Court deems it fit to direct the petitioner to appear before the Trial Court within a period of 10 (Ten) days from the date of this order without fail. Thereafter, the petitioner is directed to appear before the said Court on each and every date fixed by the said Court without fail. However, it is reflected if the petitioner does not appear within the stipulated time, the order issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation and attachment will revive but till the petitioner appears before the court within the stipulated time the orders be kept in abeyance. 6. The petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant