Writ jurisdiction cannot be used to convert post-conviction non-bailable warrants into bailable warrants.

The petitioner was the accused in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (N.I.) Act.

After summons were issued, the petitioner appeared, and a plea was recorded at Exhibit-8

During the trial, after the complainant was examined, the petitioner and their advocate failed to appear for cross-examination

Consequently, the Trial Court closed the stage for cross-examination and scheduled the recording of the petitioner’s Further Statement.

Due to continued absence, the Learned 15th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedabad, proceeded ex-parte, convicting the petitioner via judgment dated 20.02.2026 and issuing a Non-Bailable Warrant (NBW)

The petitioner moved the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking to convert the NBW into a bailable warrant to facilitate the filing of an appeal against the conviction

Whether the High Court should exercise its extraordinary jurisdiction to convert a non-bailable warrant into a bailable warrant when the petitioner consistently failed to appear before the Trial Court without sufficient cause

The court's decision was governed by Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding the underlying offense

The court applied the principle of judicial discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution, emphasizing that extraordinary relief is not warranted where a party's conduct demonstrates negligence or a deliberate bypass of the Trial Court's authority

the appropriate remedy for the cancellation or modification of a warrant lies with the issuing court

The Court observed that the petitioner had actively participated in the initial stages of the trial but subsequently abandoned the proceedings after the plea was recorded

The Court found no evidence on record to suggest that the petitioner was prevented from appearing by circumstances beyond their control

Given that the petitioner chose not to remain present even at the stage of the pronouncement of judgment, the Trial Court’s decision to proceed ex-parte and issue a warrant was deemed proper

The High Court rejected the petitioner’s reliance on previous co-ordinate bench judgments, concluding that a petitioner cannot bypass the Trial Court to seek conversion of a warrant when they have the liberty to appear before the original court and request a cancellation of the warrant

The Court ruled that no direction could be issued to convert the non-bailable warrant into a bailable warrant in these circumstances

It clarified that it remains open for the petitioner to appear before the Learned Trial Court and formally request the cancellation of the issued warrant