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
Law Points
- Execution of warrants under Code of Civil Procedure
- 1908 (CPC) -- Supreme Court directives on timely disposal of execution applications -- Judicial oversight of cross-state warrant execution procedures -- Court's authority to seek assistance from law officers in execution matters
Case Details
2026 LawText (BOM) (02) 25
Chambers Summons No. 455 of 2014 in Execution Application No. 853 of 2015
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.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
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
Acts & Sections
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908: Execution provisions
