PINKYBEN MITESHBHAI DALAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned advocate Mr.Vaibhav Sheth has submitted that the petitioners, who are the advocates, are facing the trial under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and non-bailable warrant issued on 15/4/2023, which was referred in the Rojkam. He has submitted that when the petitioners came into knowledge with regard to issuance of non- bailable warrant, they immediately appeared before the concerned court requesting to convert the non-bailable warrant into the bailable warrant, for which the application was also preferred on the same day, which is at page no.78, however, the concerned court has not accepted the application on the ground that the complainant had not given "no objection" for the same.

(2.) This Court has considered the submissions made by the learned advocate for the petitioners and learned APP and also perused the matter. It transpires from the record that the non-bailable warrant was issued by the court below on 15/4/2023 and there is no any separate order, which shows that non-bailable warrant issued, only from Rojkam it reveals. That on the same day the application was preferred by the petitioners, who are the advocates, for converting non-bailable warrant to bailable warrant.

(3.) It is settled law that non-bailable warrant should normally not to be issued if presence of the accused could be secured. The warrant could be issued when the person will not voluntarily appear in Court or police authorities are unable to find the person to serve him with a summon. The Court should avoid issuance of non-bailable warrant in the first instance to secure presence of the accused and it should be applied as a last resort.