IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 209 CRM-M-29637-2025 Date of decision: 01.07.2025 PARVEEN @ DIMPLE ….PETITIONER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA ...RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present: Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana. **** MANISHA BATRA, J (ORAL) 1. The petitioner is seeking concession of regular bail in case FIR No. 397 dated 03.11.2022 (Annexure P-1) registered under Sections 148, 149, 307, 170, 420, 279, 336, 427, 120-B IPC and Section 25-1B(1) of Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Sadar Narwana, District Jind. He was previously extended benefit by this Court in this case vide order dated 20.03.2024 (Annexure P-2). He absented himself on 29.01.2025 due to which his bail was cancelled and bonds were forfeited to State. Now he is in custody since 14.05.2025. 2. It is inter alia contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that his absence on 29.01.2025 was not intentional but was due to reason that he had to appear in some other case in Kaithal Court. On that day, he had moved an application for seeking exemption from appearance. The said application was, however, dismissed. He had been appearing regularly before the trial Court earlier. He is ready to abide by the terms and conditions as imposed by this Court. It is, therefore, urged that the petitioner deserves to be granted the concession of bail. MANOJ KUMAR 2025.07.02 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-29637-2025 -2- 3. Notice of motion. 4. Mr. Neeraj Poswal, AAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and submits that the petitioner does not deserve the concession of bail as he has delayed the trial of the case by moving applications seeking exemptions time and again and his bail was rightly cancelled by passing a detailed and speaking order. 5. The petitioner had not appeared before the trial Court on 29.01.2025. He had moved an application before the trial Court on that day seeking exemption by submitting that he had to appear before the Kaithal Court in some other case. On going through the record, the absence of petitioner on 29.01.2025 cannot be said to be intentional. The petitioner is now in custody since 14.05.2025. Keeping in view the discussion as made above but without meaning to make any comment on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed. The petitioner is ordered to be released on bail subject to his furnishing personal and surety bonds to the extent of two sureties to the satisfaction of the Trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned. 01.07.2025 [MANISHA BATRA] manoj JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No MANOJ KUMAR 2025.07.02 09:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document