CRM-M- 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 185 GURDITTA SINGH @GURDIT SINGH @SUKHI STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: SURYA P Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 04.12.2025 Sri Muktsar Sahib abovementioned order, the bail of petitioner thereof, the his presence in 2. 3. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab behalf of respondent/State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby -39419-2026(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA CHANDIGARH GURDITTA SINGH @GURDIT SINGH @SUKHI VERSUS OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P Mr. Satnam Singh, Advocate for Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J (ORAL) This is a petition filed under Section 528 of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023’, seeking 4.12.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Sri Muktsar Sahib, hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’ abovementioned order, the bail of petitioner thereof, the bail bonds of the petitioner have been presence in the Court, his warrants of arr Notice of motion. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab behalf of respondent/State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-39419-2026 (O&M) DECIDED ON: 20.07.2026 GURDITTA SINGH @GURDIT SINGH @SUKHI .....PETITIONER VERSUS .....RESPONDENT SURYA PARTAP SINGH , Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. This is a petition filed under Section 528 of ‘the Bharatiya ’, seeking for quashing of order dated ) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’ only. By virtue of abovementioned order, the bail of petitioner was cancelled. As a result of the petitioner have been forfeited and to procure of arrest issued. Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby (O&M) .2026 .....PETITIONER .....RESPONDENT Bharatiya for quashing of order dated Additional Sessions Judge only. By virtue of As a result forfeited and to procure Since advance notice has already been served upon the State, accepts notice on behalf of respondent/State. Hence, service of notice upon the State is hereby GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 2 dispensed with. However, n learned State counsel has opted to orally oppose the present petition 4. the petitioner was regularly appearing before t 13.02.2026 miscommunication abovementioned circumstances, the impugned order was passed, which deserves to be quashed. 5. present before the learned trial Court imposed in the bail left with no option but to cancel the bail order, forfeit t issue warrant illegality in the abovementioned order, the the impugned order. 6. liberty for the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court and move an application for bail. The learned counsel for the pe a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the bail application, to be moved by the petitioner, in a time 7. a direction to the petitioner to a period of one month from today Court within the stipulated period -39419-2026(O&M) d with. However, no formal reply has been filed by the State and the learned State counsel has opted to orally oppose the present petition It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was regularly appearing before t 13.02.2026 he could not appear before the learned trial Court miscommunication. As per learned counsel for the petitioner abovementioned circumstances, the impugned order was passed, which deserves to be quashed. In view of above, once, admittedly before the learned trial Court in compliance with the conditions imposed in the bail order, it is hereby held that the learned trial Court was left with no option but to cancel the bail order, forfeit t issue warrant of arrest against the petitioner. Since apparently, there is no illegality in the abovementioned order, the the impugned order. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought liberty for the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court and move an application for bail. The learned counsel for the pe a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the bail application, to be moved by the petitioner, in a time-bound manner. In view of above, the present petition is hereby a direction to the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court a period of one month from today. If he within the stipulated period and move formal reply has been filed by the State and the learned State counsel has opted to orally oppose the present petition. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court, but, on before the learned trial Court due to some rned counsel for the petitioner, in the abovementioned circumstances, the impugned order was passed, which ove, once, admittedly the petitioner was in compliance with the conditions order, it is hereby held that the learned trial Court was left with no option but to cancel the bail order, forfeit the bail bonds and of arrest against the petitioner. Since apparently, there is no illegality in the abovementioned order, there is no scope for interference in At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought liberty for the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court and move an application for bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the bail application, to be bound manner. In view of above, the present petition is hereby disposed of with surrender before the learned trial Court within surrenders before the learned trial and moves an application for bail, the formal reply has been filed by the State and the It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he learned trial Court, but, on due to some , in the abovementioned circumstances, the impugned order was passed, which not in compliance with the conditions order, it is hereby held that the learned trial Court was he bail bonds and of arrest against the petitioner. Since apparently, there is no re is no scope for interference in At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner has sought liberty for the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court and move titioner has prayed for a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the bail application, to be with within before the learned trial application for bail, the GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- 3 learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the bail ap days. It is, however, clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be at liberty to take the petitioner into custody and/or impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 446 of CrPC). Gaurav Thakur -39419-2026(O&M) learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the bail ap days. It is, however, clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be at liberty to take the petitioner into custody and/or impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 446 of CrPC). learned trial Court is directed to dispose of the bail application within two days. It is, however, clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be at liberty to take the petitioner into custody and/or impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 446 of CrPC). two days. It is, however, clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be at liberty to take the petitioner into custody and/or impose GAURAV THAKUR 2026.07.21 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document