131 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA ASHISH STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Ms Ms. Jaspreet Kaur Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. This petition has been filed under Section seeking quashing of (Annexures P-3 Court, Fatehgarh Sahib in case bearing FIR No.0238 da registered under Sections 379 Police Station Mandi Gobindgarh cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bonds have been forfeited to the State followed by issuance of non 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner petitioner was on regular bail in the present case and was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. However, due to regarding the next date of hearing, he could not appear before the learned trial Court. Due to his non of the petitioner and non IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Ms. Kamaldeep Kaur, Advocate with Ms. Jaspreet Kaur Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section seeking quashing of impugned orders dated and P-4) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court, Fatehgarh Sahib in case bearing FIR No.0238 da registered under Sections 379-B, 34 (later on added Section 411 of IPC) at Police Station Mandi Gobindgarh, whereby, the bail of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bonds have been forfeited to the State issuance of non-bailable warrants. Learned counsel for the petitioner petitioner was on regular bail in the present case and was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. However, due to regarding the next date of hearing, he could not appear before the learned trial Court. Due to his non-appearance, the learned trial Court of the petitioner and non-bailable warrants were IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-28988-2025 Date of decision: 26.05.2025 ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR with Ms. Jaspreet Kaur Sandhu, Advocate This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 dated 17.03.2025 and 16.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Special Court, Fatehgarh Sahib in case bearing FIR No.0238 dated 21.12.2023 B, 34 (later on added Section 411 of IPC) at the bail of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bonds have been forfeited to the State Learned counsel for the petitioner submits contends that the petitioner was on regular bail in the present case and was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. However, due to bona fide misunderstanding, regarding the next date of hearing, he could not appear before the learned trial appearance, the learned trial Court has cancelled the bail issued. MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-28988 3. Learned counse appearance of the petitioner aggrieved by the said order petition. It is contended that the impugned order ground of unintentional non 4. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertake the trial Court on 5. Notice of motion. 6. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A. Court, accepts notice for the respondent orders have been however, it is not disputed by him that petitioner been appearing before the trial Court. 7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. 8. Many a times, the a to put an appearance before the Court on a given date and, therefore, it necessarily cannot be construed as a deliberate and wi explanation offered for non therefore, the same is accepted. 9. While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the procedure established by law to ma a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual 28988-2025 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner appearance of the petitioner was not deliberate aggrieved by the said orders, he has approached this Court by way of instant petition. It is contended that the impugned order ground of unintentional non-appearance of the petitioner It is also submitted that the petitioner undertake the trial Court on each and every date. Notice of motion. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, Court, accepts notice for the respondent-State and submits that the impugned s have been passed on the sole ground of the absence of the petitioner, however, it is not disputed by him that petitioner been appearing before the trial Court. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal. Many a times, the accused can be prevented by sufficient reasons to put an appearance before the Court on a given date and, therefore, it necessarily cannot be construed as a deliberate and wi explanation offered for non-appearance before the Court is justi therefore, the same is accepted. While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the procedure established by law to ma a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual l for the petitioner further contends that non- was not deliberate or intentional and thus, , he has approached this Court by way of instant petition. It is contended that the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the appearance of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes to appear before G., Punjab, who is present in and submits that the impugned passed on the sole ground of the absence of the petitioner, however, it is not disputed by him that petitioner was already on bail and had I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of parties, the ccused can be prevented by sufficient reasons to put an appearance before the Court on a given date and, therefore, it necessarily cannot be construed as a deliberate and willful absence. The appearance before the Court is justified and, While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the procedure established by law to maintain a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual-accused and MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-28988 interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be fair, just and not suffer fr 10. The sole purpose of issuance of non presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner case has himself Court on each and every date. 11. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is allowed. The impugned (Annexures P-3 and P petitioner were set aside. 12. Petitioner period of four weeks furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, along with costs of Rs. Funds, PGIMER, Chandigarh 13. Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. 14. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated per Court shall be deemed to be vacated. May 26, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 28988-2025 3 interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be fair, just and not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. The sole purpose of issuance of non presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner himself come forward and has undertaken to appear before the trial Court on each and every date. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present wed. The impugned orders dated 3 and P-4), vide which, the bail b cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued, etitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court period of four weeks and on his doing so, he shall be admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, ong with costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with Funds, PGIMER, Chandigarh for wasting precious time Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this Court shall be deemed to be vacated. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be fair, just om the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. The sole purpose of issuance of non-bailable warrants is to secure presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner in the present undertaken to appear before the trial In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present orders dated 17.03.2025 and 16.05.2025 the bail bonds and bail order of the bailable warrants were issued, are hereby is directed to appear before the trial Court within a doing so, he shall be admitted to bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, to be deposited with Poor Patients Welfare for wasting precious time of the Court. Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the iod, the interim protection granted by this HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No Poor Patients Welfare MANISHA 2025.05.26 18:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment