01Facts
The petitioner, Accused No. 2 in a Sessions case concerning alleged offences under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC, had earlier been granted bail by the Sessions Court on 4 January 2021.
p. 3After committal of the case, the Sessions Court issued summons; the summons to the petitioner was returned with an endorsement that he had left the address.
pp. 3–6The High Court noted that police had sought time to execute the summons, but the Sessions Court nevertheless issued a non-bailable warrant (NBW).
pp. 3–6The NBW was executed on 4 September 2026, and the petitioner was remanded to custody.
pp. 3–6His subsequent bail application was rejected on 1 October 2026, principally on the ground that he had failed to appear and cooperate with the proceedings
pp. 3–602Issues
i.1. Whether the Sessions Court’s issuance of an NBW and rejection of bail were justified where the summons had not been served and the police had sought time to execute it.
pp. 3–6ii.2. Whether the petitioner should be released on bail in the circumstances of the case.
pp. 6–703Law Applied
The petition was considered under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, as referred to in the proceedings.
p. 2, 4The alleged offences were under Sections 399 and 402 of the IPC.
pp. 2–3The Court applied the procedural principle that a court issuing a warrant must consider whether summons has been served and must exercise judicial discretion before directing coercive process; a bail decision must likewise be supported by proper consideration and reasons.
p. 6Provisions in the judgment · 4 · Linked ones open on LawLens
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 439
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Indian Penal Code, 1860 Section 399Section 402
04Reasoning
The High Court found that the record showed the summons had not been served on the petitioner and that the police had sought further time for its execution.
pp. 6–7In those circumstances, the Sessions Court’s issuance of an NBW without adequately considering the service position was held to be without proper application of judicial mind.
pp. 6–7The High Court also found that the bail rejection did not adequately address those circumstances and was not supported by proper reasons.
pp. 6–7It therefore held the Sessions Court’s findings contrary to the law and facts of the case.
pp. 6–705Holding
The High Court allowed the petition and directed the petitioner’s release on bail.
p. 7He was required to execute a personal bond of ₹1,00,000 with one surety for the like sum, refrain from tampering with or otherwise interfering with witnesses, and appear before the trial court on every hearing date.
p. 7Original Court PDF
SYED SHABBIR @ SHABBIER PASHAvsSTATE OF KARNATAKA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
