229 CRM-M-29042-2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-29042-2025 Date of decision: 01.07.2025 BALRAJ SINGH ALIAS BALLU ….Petitioner Versus STATE OF PUNJAB ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV BERRY Present:- Mr. Neeraj Jain, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Durgesh Garg, AAG Punjab. ..… SANJIV BERRY, J. (ORAL) The instant petition under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 has been moved by the petitioner seeking quashing of the order dated 15.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) in case FIR No.94 dated 26.07.2023 registered under Sections 15(b) of NDPS Act P.S. Gidderbaha Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib in case CIS No.NDPS-78-2024 titled as ‘State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Ballu etc.’, vide which bail/surety bonds of the petitioner had been cancelled and forfeited to the State and non-bailable warrants of arrest had been issued against the petitioner. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners inter alia contends that in compliance of the order dated 26.05.2025, petitioner appeared before the Puneet Sharma 2025.07.01 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 229 CRM-M-29042-2025 -2- learned Magistrate on duty on 02.06.2025 and furnished requisite bail bonds, surety bonds and has placed on record copy of order dated 10.06.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib. He contends that since the petitioner has joined the trial Court proceedings, as such the order dated 15.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib vide which bail/surety bonds of the petitioner had been cancelled and forfeited to the State and non-bailable warrants of arrest had been issued against the petitioner, be quashed. 3. Learned State counsel has not disputed the aforesaid factual matrix of the case and submits that petitioner appeared on 02.06.2025 before the learned trial Court and furnished requisite bail bonds. 4. Heard. 5. During the course of the proceedings, following order was passed on 26.05.2025:- “ By way of present petition filed under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS), the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 15.01.2025 (Annexure P-2) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, in case No. CIS No. NDPS-78-2024, titled as ‘State of Punjab vs. Balraj Singh @ Ballu etc.’ vide which bail/surety bonds of the petitioner had been cancelled and forfeited to the State and non bailable warrants of arrest had been issued against the petitioner, in case FIR (Annexure P-1) as mentioned below: FIR No. Dated Sections Police Station 94 26.07.2023 15(b) of NDPS Act Gidderbaha Sahib, District Sri Muktsar Sahib. 2. Heard. Puneet Sharma 2025.07.01 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 229 CRM-M-29042-2025 -3- 3. It is, inter alia, contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner after having been granted bail in case FIR (Annexure P-1), had been regularly appearing in the Court to face the trial, before the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib. He contends that on 15.01.2025 on account of miscommunication of date, the petitioner could not appear before the learned Trial Court, leading to cancellation of bail and issuance of non-bailable warrants of arrest. He contends that now the case is pending for 08.08.2025. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the absence of the petitioner was not intentional but on account of miscommunication of the date and contends that if granted the concession of bail, the petitioner will regularly appear in the Court on each and every date of hearing without fail and face the trial. 5. Notice of motion, returnable for 01.07.2025. 6. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Jatinder Pal Singh, Sr. DAG Punjab, who is present in Court, accepts notice and does not dispute the factual matrix of the case. He submits that next date fixed before the learned Trial Court is 08.08.2025. 7. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances, the petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court/Judge on duty/Duty Magistrate within a period of 07 days from today and in that event, learned Trial Court/Judge on duty/Duty Magistrate will admit the petitioner on interim bail subject to its satisfaction on his furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds. 8. The petitioner shall also furnish a specific undertaking before the learned Trial Court/Judge on duty that, in future, he would be regularly appearing before the concerned Court on each and every date and in case of some exigency, he will seek prior permission of the concerned Court qua his exemption to appear on the date fixed. 9. The Trial Court is directed to communicate the order on the appearance of the petitioner in this Court immediately, through appropriate channel well before the date of hearing. 6. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has already appeared on 02.06.2025 before the learned trial Court and furnished their requisite bail/surety bonds consequent to the order dated 26.05.2025, Puneet Sharma 2025.07.01 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment 229 CRM-M-29042-2025 -4- passed by this Court, the present petition is allowed and order dated 15.01.2025 (Annexure P-2), passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, vide which bail/surety bonds of the petitioner had been cancelled and forfeited to the State and non-bailable warrants of arrest had been issued against the petitioner is hereby set aside and the interim bail granted vide order dated 26.05.2025 is hereby confirmed. 7. The petition stands disposed of. (SANJIV BERRY) 01.07.2025 JUDGE puneet i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/No ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No Puneet Sharma 2025.07.01 16:17 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment