ORDER : B. SUDHEENDRA KUMAR, J. 1. The petitioner is the 3rd accused in C.C. No. 1548 of 2016 on the files of the court below. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are offences under Sections 341, 294 (b), 323, 324 and 354 B IPC. 2. After filing the final report before the court below, the court took cognizance for the above said offences. Thereafter, the court issued non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner after recording that the petitioner was absconding. Aggrieved by the said order of the court below, this Crl.M.C. has been filed. 3. Heard. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner was granted the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the High Court at the crime stage as per order dated 7-7-2015 in Bail Application 3767 of 2015 and in the said circumstances, the court below was not justified in issuing non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner at the first instance. The learned counsel has brought to my notice to the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 438 Cr.P.C. which provides that if a Magistrate taking cognizance of the offences, decides to issue warrant at the first instance against the accused, who had been granted the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C., he shall issue only a bail-able warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub-section (1) of Section 438 Cr.P.C. 5. It appears from Annexure-II order passed by the court below that the court below issued non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner on the basis of the endorsement made by the police in the final report that the petitioner was absconding. It is clear from the mandates of Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. that the Magistrate taking cognizance of the offence should not issue non-bail-able warrant in the first instance against the accused, who had been granted the relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C., even if the Magistrate decides to issue warrant at the first instance. As per order dated 15-10-2016, the court below issued non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner after taking cognizance of the offences after the filing of the final report by the police. In view of the provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., the order passed by the learned Magistrate issuing non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner at the first instance, cannot be said to be legal and correct and consequently, the same cannot be sustained. In view of the provisions of Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C., the order passed by the learned Magistrate issuing non-bail-able warrant against the petitioner at the first instance, cannot be said to be legal and correct and consequently, the same cannot be sustained. In the result, this Crl. M.C. stands allowed and the order dated 15-10-2016 passed by the court below in C.C. No. 1548/2016 stands quashed and the court below is directed to issue necessary order for the appearance of the accused by taking recourse to the provisions of Section 438 (3) Cr.P.C. in the first instance.