High Court Seeks Assistance for Execution of Non-Bailable Warrant in Pending Execution Application. Court Directs Additional Solicitor General to Assist in Cross-State Warrant Execution

Sub Category: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 19
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The High Court of Bombay addressed the issue of non-execution of Non-Bailable Warrants in pending Execution Applications, particularly those involving respondents located outside Maharashtra. The Court noted that numerous Execution Applications remain pending due to non-execution of warrants issued outside the state. In the specific case of Execution Application No. 853 of 2015, a Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against Respondent No. 2 who had shifted to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Despite multiple reminders sent to the Senior Inspector of Police, Manduadih Police Station, Varanasi, no execution report was submitted. The Court referenced a Supreme Court directive requiring disposal of Execution Applications within six months and sought assistance from the Additional Solicitor General to ensure execution of the warrant against Respondent No. 2.

Headnote

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay -- The Court noted numerous Execution Applications remain pending as Bailable or Non-Bailable Warrants issued outside Maharashtra have not been executed for significant periods -- The Court requested Mr. Anil Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General to assist -- In this specific Execution Application pending since 2015, a Non-Bailable Warrant was issued against Respondent No. 2 who had shifted to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh -- Despite multiple reminders sent to the Senior Inspector of Police, Manduadih Police Station, Varanasi, no execution report was submitted -- The Court referenced Supreme Court order in Periyammal (Dead Through LRs) & Ors. vs. V. Rajamani & Anr. directing disposal of Execution Applications within six months -- The Court directed the Additional Solicitor General to assist in ensuring execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2

Issue of Consideration: The Issue of non-execution of Non-Bailable Warrants issued against respondents located outside the State of Maharashtra in pending Execution Applications

Final Decision

The Court noted the non-execution of Non-Bailable Warrants in pending Execution Applications and directed the Additional Solicitor General to assist in ensuring execution of the Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2 -- The Court referenced Supreme Court directives on timely disposal of execution matters

2026 LawText (BOM) (02) 25

Chambers Summons No. 455 of 2014 in Execution Application No. 853 of 2015

2026-02-04

Madhav J. Jamdar J.

2026:BHC-OS:3369

Mr. Gaurav Jain i/b. M/s. DS Law for Applicant, Mr. Anil C. Singh, Additional Solicitor General of India a/w. Mr. Aditya Thakkar, Mr. D. P. Singh, Mr. Adarsh Vyas, Ms. Rama Gupta, Mr. Krishnakant Deshmukh, Mr. Rajdatta Nagre for Union of India

Integro Finserv Private Limited

Santoshkumar Ramsajeevan Dewivedi & Anr.

Nature of Litigation: Execution Application pending before High Court for enforcement of orders

Remedy Sought

Applicant seeking execution of Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2

Filing Reason

Non-execution of warrants issued against respondents located outside Maharashtra

Previous Decisions

Order dated 7th January 2026 noting pending Execution Applications -- Order dated 23rd July 2025 directing re-issue of Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2 -- Supreme Court order dated 6th March 2025 in Periyammal case directing disposal of Execution Applications within six months

Issues

Whether Non-Bailable Warrants issued against respondents located outside Maharashtra can be effectively executed -- Whether judicial intervention is required to ensure timely execution of warrants in pending Execution Applications

Submissions/Arguments

Numerous Execution Applications remain pending due to non-execution of warrants issued outside Maharashtra -- In this specific case, Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2 could not be executed as he shifted to Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh -- Multiple reminders sent to police authorities yielded no execution report -- Supreme Court has directed disposal of Execution Applications within six months

Ratio Decidendi

Courts must ensure effective execution of warrants, particularly in cross-state scenarios -- Judicial oversight is necessary when execution authorities fail to comply with court orders -- Supreme Court directives on timely disposal of execution applications must be followed -- Law officers can be requested to assist in execution matters requiring inter-state coordination

Judgment Excerpts

"this Court noted that numerous Execution Applications remain pending, as Bailable or Non-Bailable Warrants issued outside the State of Maharashtra have not been executed for a significant period" -- "The Supreme Court by order dated 6th March 2025 passed in the case of Periyammal (Dead Through LRs) & Ors. vs. V. Rajamani & Anr. has directed that Execution Application, to be disposed of within a period of six months"

Procedural History

Execution Application filed in 2015 -- Order dated 23rd July 2025 directing re-issue of Non-Bailable Warrant against Respondent No. 2 -- Warrant addressed to Senior Inspector of Police, Manduadih Police Station, Varanasi -- Multiple reminders sent on 25th September 2025, 6th December 2025, 18th December 2025 -- No execution report received -- Court order dated 7th January 2026 seeking assistance from Additional Solicitor General -- Hearing on 4th February 2026

Related Judgement
High Court High Court Seeks Assistance for Execution of Non-Bailable Warrant in Pending Exe...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Complaint Against Physician in Sex Determination C...