IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.889 of 2008 DR.BAIDYANATH SINGH SON OF LATE RAM SEVAK SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – GARURA, P.O. + P.S. SANJHOWLI, DISTRICT ROHTAS AT PRESENT WORKING AS HEAD OF DEPARTMENT IN HINDI IN RAM LAKHAN SINGH YADAV COLLEGE, AURANGABAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE LAW DEPARTMENT BIHAR, PATNA ----------- 07. 07.04.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the state. The grievance of the petitioner is for quashing he order dated 17th of April 2008, passed in G.R. No. 101/2001, 352/2007 and 294/2008 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist class, Aurangabad (State Versus Vaidyanath Singh). It is submitted that on the previous date in the said case, on 13th of February 2008, petitioner had appeared through the representation by his lawyer. On the said date, the order was passed for appearance of the petitioner in person on 17.04.2008 for supply of the police paper as also for framing of charges. It is further submitted that the said order could not be communicated to the petitioner by his lawyer and as such, he could not remain present in person, however, the petitioner was represented by way of representation through his lawyer on the said date i.e. 17th of April 2008. The said representation of the petitioner was rejected, his bail bond was cancelled and non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued as well as show cause notices were issued to the bailors. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that petitioner had absolutely no intention to disobey the order of the court but for want of communication, petitioner could not remain present on 17th of April 2008 vide Annexure- 5. It is further submitted that notwithstanding the above, petitioner was appointed as Head Examiner of the examination which was scheduled to be commenced from 10th of April 2008, and as such, petitioner got himself represented through his lawyer. Learned counsel for the State submits that petitioner, instead of assailing the aforesaid order, ought to have appeared in the court and file his explanation for non- appearance. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, in the interest of justice, the order issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest pursuant to the order dated 17th of April 2008, if not executed till date, be kept in abeyance. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the next date in the aforesaid case i.e. 3rd of June 2011, petitioner would appear and shall make appropriate submission/application. However, on the said date i.e. 3rd of June 2011, if the petitioner fails to appear, the non- bailable warrant of arrest issued pursuant to the impugned order dated 17.04.2008 , shall be given effect. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court of Judicial Magistrate, Ist class, Aurangabad through fax at the cost being deposited by the petitioner. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J.)