Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010118042026 2026:GAU-AS:8447 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Crl.Pet./833/2026 PREDIAL SANGMA ALIAS PREDIEL K SANGMA, SON OF LATE EXPART MARAK, PERMANENT RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 21, GAJINGPARA, NEW PUTIMARY, MENDIPATHAR, P.S. MENDIPATHAR, DISTRICT NORTH GARO HILLS, MEGHALAYA, PIN-794112. VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANR REPRESENTED BY THE LEARNED PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM. 2:SRI DILIP RAVA SON OF SRI BHAY RAM RAVA RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BHOGDARBARI P.S. BOKO DISTRICT KAMRUP ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. A BHATTACHARYA, S J BASAK,MS ANKITA SAHARIA,MR S PAUL,MR. A BHATTACHARJEE,MS K TALUKDAR,MS. K MALAKAR Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 12.06.2026 [1] Heard Ms. K. Malakar, the learned counsel Page No.# 2/4 for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. [2] This criminal petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been preferred by the petitioner, impugning the order dated 08.01.2025, by which non- bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner in connection with G.R. Case No. 2035/2014, pending before the court of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Boko, Kamrup. [3] The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had never received any summons from the trial court, however, the trial court, by the impugned order, without verifying the service of the summons on the petitioner issued the non-bailable warrant of arrest against him. [4] She submits that the petitioner recently came to know about the pendency of G.R. Case No. 2035/2014 against him and also the fact that a non- bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against him. She submits that the petitioner is ready to face the trial and co-operate in the trial. However, unless, the impugned order is quashed and the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against him may be effective, he shall be highly prejudiced. [5] The learned counsel for the petitioner Page No.# 3/4 further submits that the petitioner has annexed all the orders passed by the trial court since the inception of the G.R. Case and no where it is indicated that the summons were duly served on the petitioner. [6] On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submits that if the petitioner is ready to co-operate in trial, he does not have any objection to the prayer made by the petitioner. [7] On perusal of the records, including the orders passed by the trial court in G.R. Case No. 2035/2014, it appears that the trial court issued non- bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner without ascertaining due service of summons on him. As such, the trial court was not right in issuing the non-bailable warrant of arrest. [8] Accordingly, the order dated 08.01.2025 and subsequent orders to the extent of issuance of non- bailable warrant of arrest are quashed. [9] The petitioners are directed to appear before the trial court on the next date fixed, i.e., 17.06.2026. [10] To facilitate his appearance before the trial court, the operation of non-bailable warrant issued by the trial court shall remain stayed, till his appearance before the trial court. [11] With the above observations, this criminal Page No.# 4/4 petition is disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant