HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.7325 of 2009 Dated : 14.09.2009 Between : B.Govinda Swamy ….. Petitioner a n d The State of A.P. ….. Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.BHAVANI PRASAD Criminal Petition No.7325 of 2009 ORDER: Heard Sri A.Hariprasada Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri A.Ramesh, learned counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor for the sole respondent. The petitioner is aggrieved by the issuance of a non-bailable warrant by the trial Court to secure his presence to depose as a witness in S.C.No.58 of 2005 on its file. The petitioner, a retired Police Officer, claims to be suffering from very serious problems of health, due to which, he is not even able to move and he therefore, requested the Court for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to record his evidence after recalling the warrant. That petition was returned by the Court to explain as to how the petition is maintainable without the appearance in person of the petitioner against which the petitioner approached this Court. It is evident from the material on record that the petition is not dismissed by the trial Court as stated in para No.4 of the criminal petition and that it was only returned. The petitioner claims that he has ailments of kidneys and hypertension and he also has an infection in the intestine leading to fall of flesh pieces while passing urine, due to which, he is even unable to walk due to lack of haemoglobin in the blood. Under such circumstances, the personal physical presence of the petitioner before the trial Court before the petition for recall of warrant is considered on merits may be imposing a condition, which defeats the very purpose for which the petitioner is requesting the trial Court to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to examine him due to his inability to move. Under the circumstances, in order to secure the ends of justice, an appropriate direction can be given to the trial Court in this regard without interfering with the jurisdiction exercised by the trial Court in issuing the non-bailable warrant or in returning the petition for recalling the warrant. The trial Court will undoubtedly ensure compliance with the necessity to observe the salutary humanitarian approach to be adopted in such deserving cases without too much insistence on technicalities. Accordingly, the non-bailable warrant issued against the petitioner in S.C.No.58 of 2005 on the file of the V Additional Sessions Judge, Nellore, shall be kept in abeyance till a decision on merits on the petition by the petitioner which shall be represented to the Court by the petitioner and the said petition for recall of the non-bailable warrant and appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence of the petitioner may be considered and decided on merits in accordance with law by the trial Court keeping in view the age of the petitioner and the ailments which he claims to be suffering from and it is open to the petitioner to produce such evidence as he may desire to produce for the consideration of the trial Court concerning such ailments. The criminal petition is ordered accordingly. ______________________ G.BHAVANI PRASAD, J 14th September, 2009 SUR