HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 18931 of 2026 Court No. - 76 HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR PACHORI, J. Sri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Chhavipal Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State are present. The present application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Special Case No. 405 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 1254 of 2017, under Sections 354, 504, 506 of IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bansdih Road, District Ballia as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 29.10.2018 and the order dated 19.02.2026, whereby N.B.W. has been issued against the applicant and the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C., pending in the court of Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 1, Ballia. After some argument learned counsel for the applicant does not want to press the relief of quashing of entire proceedings and the cognizance/summoning order. Hence, these reliefs are dismissed as not pressed. So far as issuance of NBW and the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. are concerned learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was on bail at the time of issuing non-bailable warrant. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without satisfying itself that the summon and other process for attendance has been served. It is further submitted that the impugned order has been passed without considering the position of law. It is settled position of law that N.B.W. should be issued as a last resort after the litigant fails to respond the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pankaj Gupta .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) notices/summons and bailable warrant. It is further submitted that non- bailable warrant has been issued without issuing any summon and bailable warrant. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 have opposed the application. Considering submissions of learned counsel for the applicants and perusing record, the instant application is finally disposed of with a direction that in case applicant appears before the court below within three weeks from today and applies for bail/recall of non bailable warrant, his application shall be decided in the light of the observations made in the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Another, (2021) 10 SCC 773, Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Another 2022 (11) SCC 676 and Aman Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director 2021 SCC Online SC 941. For a period of three weeks from today or till applicant appears before the court below, whichever is earlier, execution of non bailable warrant as well as proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C. against applicant shall be kept in abeyance. May 7, 2026 MAA/- NA528 No. 18931 of 2026 2 (Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad