Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010084202026 2026:GAU-AS:6040 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./603/2026 ABHIJIT BORA SON OF NAREN BORA RESIDENT OF WARD NO.10, PURBANCHAL PATH, GOLAGHAT TOWN, P.O. GOLAGHAT, P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST. GOLAGHAT, ASSAM. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REP. BY THE PP, ASSAM. Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K BORUAH, MS. M BHUYAN,MS P DAS,MS. P BORAH,MR. M ALAM Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE MITALI THAKURIA O R D E R Date : 04.05.2026. Heard Ms. P. Borah, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam appearing on behalf of the State respondent. Page No.# 2/4 This criminal petition under Section 528 read with Section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 is filed seeking for setting aside the orders dated 26.07.2023 and subsequent orders including the last order dated 18.05.2024, passed by the learned FMFC, Golaghat in PRC No.145/2021, issuing NBWA and P&A against the present petitioner. It is submitted by Ms. Borah, the learned counsel for the petitioner that the present accused petitioner was shown arrest in connection with this case and there after he got bail and was regularly appearing before the learned Trial Court below. The charges were also accordingly framed on 06.12.2022 and there after the petitioner was under the bona fide belief that his engaged counsel is taking steps on his behalf. But the engaged counsel did not make any contact with the present petitioner and hence, he was unaware about the proceedings and the dates fixed by the learned Trial Court below. However, coming to know about the issuance of the NBWA and P&A against him, the petitioner immediately appeared before this Court with a prayer for recalling the order as stated above and he is ready and willing to appear before the learned Trial Court below on each and every date, to be fixed by the Court and to contest the case accordingly. Mr. Sarma, the learned Addl. P.P., Assam submitted in this regard that after framing of the charge on 06.12.2022, the accused petitioner remain absent except some dates and thereafter, he did not appear before the learned Trial Court below for which the learned Trial Court below vide its order dated 26.07.2023, the NBWA had to be issued against the present petitioner. But thereafter, in spite of the issuance of the NBWA, the petitioner did not appear before the learned Trial Court below, for which vide order dated 18.05.2024, Page No.# 3/4 considering the report on the NBWA and P&A, wherein it is reported that the accused was not found in the said locality, the learned Trial Court below, finding no other alternative had to issue standing warrant against the present petitioner and the case was also filed against him as fixing the case on day to day basis did not serve any purpose. Mr. Sarma accordingly raised objection and submitted that it is not a case that only the NBWA was issued by the learned Trial Court below. But considering the return of the NBWA without execution on several occasions, the order on 18.05.2024 had to be passed and hence, there cannot be any reason for recalling the order of issuance of the NBWA as well as the order dated 18.05.2024, whereby the case against the present accused petitioner was filed. Hearing the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides, I have also perused the case record and the annexure, specially the order sheets of the learned Trial Court below, filed along with the present petition. It is a fact that initially after release of the accused petitioner on bail, he was appearing before the learned Trial Court below regularly and charge was also accordingly framed on 06.12.2022 but thereafter, on many occasions, the accused petitioner remained absent for which the NBWA had to be issued by the learned Trial Court below on 26.07.2023. But in spite of issuance of the NBWA, the attendance of the petitioner could not be procured for which, finding no other alternative, the learned Trial Court below had to issue the NBWA against him. Thereafter, on receipt of the report on the P&A, finally the case was filed against the present petitioner by issuing the standing warrant of arrest against him. Thus it is seen that the learned Trial Page No.# 4/4 Court below had made every attempt to procure the attendance of the present petitioner and only after filing of the case and coming to know about the issuance of the standing warrant of arrest against him, the petitioner had approached before the Court wherein he remained absent for about three years. Considering all these aspects of this case, this Court is of opinion that the learned Trial Court below had rightly passed the orders and hence, interference of this Court is not at all necessary. However, the petitioner is hereby directed to surrender before the learned Trial Court below with an appropriate application for bail and in that event, the case may be re-opened and considering the ground for his absence, the appropriate order of bail may be passed, in accordance with law. It is ordered accordingly. This criminal petition stands allowed and disposed of accordingly. JUDGE Comparing Assistant