Telangana High Court
Mrs. Evnice L Chawngthu, vs The I Acmm, on 28 March, 2025
Author: P.Sam Koshy
Bench: P.Sam Koshy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
WRIT PETITION NO.7314 OF 2025
ORDER:
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice Narsing Rao Nandikonda)
This writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking
the following relief:
“to issue an order direction or a writ in the nature of a certiorari
mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing the 1strespondent to
permit the petitioner to appear through video conference and not to
insist on her personal appearance before learned I Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate recall for of the BW/NBWs issued against the
petitioner for personal appearance and for sureties and to direct the 2nd
respondent not to cause the arrest of the petitioner without prior leave
of this Court, report compliance before this Court and pass such other
order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and
circumstances of the case and further prayed that in order to prevent a
miscarriage of justice all the cases that pending against the petitioner
before the 1st Respondent be clubbed together.”
2. Mrs.Eunice Chawngthu, petitioner, though she has engaged
Sri B.Krupanandam, Advocate to represent her case, but as a
party-in-person, she herself made submissions virtually.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the learned I Additional Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate has issued two bailable and three non-bailable Warrants
against petitioner for non appearance and for non-production of sureties under
Section 448, 427 and 506 IPC and 533, 506 and 509 IPC. She contended that all
2
PSKJ & NNRJ
WP No.7314 of 2025
the cases registered are frivolous in nature and none of which are heinous in
nature or of any national importance.
4. On 28.02.2025 (AN), the Telangana Police Department represented by the
respondent No.2 and the Narsingi Police Station, sent as many as 10 to 20 police
personnel to her residence at Alkapuri Township to specifically execute the Non
Bailable Warrant issued by the respondent No.1, in respect of the matters
pertaining to the year 2018. She further contended that on 28.02.2025, the
petitioner immediately filed a petition under Section 70(2) of Code of Criminal
Procedure before respondent No.1 to recall the Bailable and Non-Bailable
Warrants issued against petitioner, but the respondent No.1 refused to receive
the same by stating that the time to file fresh petitions was over. Even though
her counsel waited in Court till 5 P.M. She further contended that again on
01.03.2025 petitioner’s counsel at 10.30 A.M. filed another application under
Section 70(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, vide USR Nos.192/25, 193/25 and
194/25. However, the respondent No.1, unlawfully rejected two recall petitions
without even assigning SR numbers and thereafter the respondent No.1 rejected
the other three recall petitions and insisting her personal appearance to recall
the Non Bailable Warrants.
5. The main contention of the petitioner/party-in-person is that she is unable
to attend the Court physically before the learned I Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Nampally, as she is facing a serious threat to her life and she being a
lonely lady from the family and she is only seeking relief in this writ petition to
permit her to appear through video-conference before respondent No.1 and
3
PSKJ & NNRJ
WP No.7314 of 2025
direct the respondent No.1 not to insist her personal appearance and recall the
Bailable and Non-Bailable Warrants pending against her.
6. Heard. Perused the material on record.
7. During the course of the arguments, the petitioner has placed list of cases
which are pending against her before the respondent No.1, which reads as under:
1. CC No.9055/2020, FIR No.103/17 filed under Section 353,506 and 509 of IPC.
2. CC No.578/18 under Section 353 IPC.
3. CC No.696/18 under Section 341, 427.
4. CC No.1310/2019 under Section 427, 448 and 506 of IPC, settled before
Lok-adalat on 06.03.2025
5. CC No.1501/2019 under Section 341 and 506 of IPC, settled before Lok-adalat on
21.02.2025.
8. It is pertinent to mention here that during the course of hearing the
petitioner though mentioned five pending cases, but she restricted the prayer
only to the extent of CC No.9055 of 2020.
9. The main grievance of the petitioner before this Court is only limited to
the aspect of permitting her to appear before the respondent No.1 through video
conference and not to insist her on physical personal appearance while recalling
the Bailable and Non-Bailable Warrants issued against her by the respondent No.1
and also in respect of furnishing of sureties.
10. The small point that arise for consideration before this Court is very
limited and the petitioner (party-in person) expressed her inability to appear
before the respondent No.1. Though she has contended that she approached the
4
PSKJ & NNRJ
WP No.7314 of 2025
respondent No.1 and filed the applications under Section 70(2) of Code of
Criminal Procedure to recall Bailable and Non Bailable Warrants, but the
respondent No.1 neither choose to accept/ receive the same nor pass any orders,
but insisting for physical appearance of the petitioner. The main contention is
that she is a lonely lady and that she is facing a serious threat to her life, liberty,
freedom and reputation and if the said relief is not granted the petitioner will
suffer hardship.
11. During and after the pandemic of COVID-19, the judicial work in the entire
country was attended and the appearances were made by utilizing the video
conferencing facility and hearing of the cases and appearances of the persons
were also made through virtually in many of the cases considering the pandemic
situation. In view of the revolution changes in the judicial system, by including
the Information Technology and the implementation of various software
application in the judicial system for the purpose of easy dispensation of justice
without causing any hardship to any of the stakeholders at large.
12. In view of the above discussed circumstances, this Bench feels that the
prayer sought by the petitioner appears to be genuine only to the extent of
appearance of the petitioner through video conference for the purpose of
recalling the non-bailable warrant in three cases, more particularly in
CC No.9055/2020, FIR No.103/17 filed under Sections 353, 506 and 509 of IPC and
the relief sought by the petitioner can be permitted considering the
circumstances stated and the interest of justice.
5
PSKJ & NNRJ
WP No.7314 of 2025
13. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to
appear before the respondent No.1 through virtual mode by filing a fresh petition
under Section 70(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure before the 1st respondent to
recall the non-bailable warrants within a period of 10 days from the date of
receipt of copy of this order. Respondent No.1 shall not insist her for personal
appearance for recalling of the non-bailable warrant. Respondent No.1 is directed
to consider the said petition on the same day and pass appropriate orders in
accordance with law.
14. The respondent No.1 is further directed to make necessary arrangements
to that effect to facilitate the petitioner to appear virtually and the relevant link
shall be made available to the petitioner and if respondent No.1 intending to
allow the said petitions, respondent No.1 shall pass orders by following due
procedure contemplated under law.
15. As far as furnishing of sureties while recalling the warrants are concerned,
we leave it open to the respondent No.1 to consider all the facts and
circumstance of the case and thereafter pass appropriate order in accordance
with law at the discretion of respondent No.1 and the Court may also consider
acceptance of a personal surety/bond.
16. It is further made clear that this facility is only limited to the extent of
CC.No.9055 of 2020 in recalling the non-bailable warrant. In future, it is for
respondent No.1 to take decision to allow the petitioner in person or virtually.
It is also made clear to the petitioner that she shall appear before the learned
6
PSKJ & NNRJ
WP No.7314 of 2025
Magistrate on all days as and when directed to appear physically. Where law
requires to do so.
17. All miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall also stand closed. No
order as to costs.
_________________________________
JUSTICE P.SAM KOSHY
________________________________________________
JUSTICE NARSING RAO NANDIKONDA
Date: 28.03.2025.
SHA