Once a summons is issued, the court can never switch to an arrest warrant.

The law explicitly allows courts to move from summons to warrant if there are real reasons to believe the person will evade or has ignored the summons.

A court can issue an arrest warrant under this section without explaining why.

The provision requires the court to record its reasons in writing before issuing such a warrant — this is a mandatory safeguard, not optional.

Missing one court date automatically leads to a warrant.

The court must confirm the summons was properly served in time and that no reasonable excuse was given before relying on clause (b) to issue a warrant.

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023

Section 90

Issue of warrant in lieu of, or in addition to, summons

A Court may, in any case in which it is empowered by this Sanhita to issue a summons for the appearance of any person, issue, after recording its reasons in writing, a warrant for his arrest—§

(a) if, either before the issue of such summons, or after the issue of the same but before the time fixed for his appearance, the Court sees reason to believe that he has absconded or will not obey the summons; or§

(b) if at such time he fails to appear and the summons is proved to have been duly served in time to admit of his appearing in accordance therewith and no reasonable excuse is offered for such failure.§

Why this exists

Summons are the gentler, first-choice tool to bring a person before court, respecting personal liberty by not resorting to arrest unless needed. But the law recognises that some people will ignore or evade a summons. This provision, carried forward from Section 87 of the old Code of Criminal Procedure, gives courts a fallback: escalate to a warrant, but only with recorded reasons, so that the shift from a mild measure to a coercive one is deliberate, justified, and reviewable rather than automatic or arbitrary.

How courts read it

Courts under the earlier, identically worded Section 87 CrPC have consistently held that this power is not routine — it is an exception to the general rule that summons should be tried first. Judgments have emphasised that 'reasons in writing' is not a formality; the court must show real material suggesting the person is absconding, evading, or has ignored a duly served summons without excuse. Mechanical or template reasoning has been struck down as improper use of this power, since it results in arrest of a person for what may otherwise be a summons-only matter.

Common misconceptions

Myth: Once a summons is issued, the court can never switch to an arrest warrant.
Fact: The law explicitly allows courts to move from summons to warrant if there are real reasons to believe the person will evade or has ignored the summons.
Myth: A court can issue an arrest warrant under this section without explaining why.
Fact: The provision requires the court to record its reasons in writing before issuing such a warrant — this is a mandatory safeguard, not optional.
Myth: Missing one court date automatically leads to a warrant.
Fact: The court must confirm the summons was properly served in time and that no reasonable excuse was given before relying on clause (b) to issue a warrant.