152 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA KESHAV AND ANOTHER STATE OF HARYANA CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. This petition has been filed under Section seeking quashing of 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P respectively) passed by learned Judicial Mag bearing FIR No. 34 of IPC at Police Station of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bo forfeited to the State followed by issuance of non 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner misunderstanding with the counsel, the petitioners failed to appear before the learned trial Court. Due to cancelled the bail of the petitioner issued. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner appearance of the petitioner aggrieved by the said order IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH KESHAV AND ANOTHER V/S HARYANA HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Rakesh Kumar Lathwal, Advocate for the petitioner **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This petition has been filed under Section seeking quashing of impugned orders dated 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P respectively) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonipat bearing FIR No.211 dated 04.05.2020 registered under Sections at Police Station Sadar Sonipat, District Sonipat, of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bo forfeited to the State followed by issuance of non Learned counsel for the petitioner misunderstanding with the counsel, the petitioners failed to appear before the learned trial Court. Due to their non-appearance, the learned trial Court has cancelled the bail of the petitioners and their Learned counsel for the petitioners appearance of the petitioners was not deliberate aggrieved by the said orders, they have approached this Court by way of IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-34598-2025 Date of decision: 07.07.2025 ...PETITIONERS ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR Advocate for the petitioners. This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 impugned orders dated 05.10.2023, 13.05.2024, 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P-4 to P-15 istrate Ist Class, Sonipat in case registered under Sections 188, 323, 506, District Sonipat, whereby, the bail of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bonds have been forfeited to the State followed by issuance of non-bailable warrants. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that due to some misunderstanding with the counsel, the petitioners failed to appear before the appearance, the learned trial Court has their non-bailable warrants were s inter alia contends that non- was not deliberate or intentional and thus, approached this Court by way of MANISHA 2025.07.07 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-34598 instant petition. It is contended that the impugned order aside on the ground of unintentional non 4. It is the trial Court on 5. Notice of motion. 6. Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana accepts notice for the respondent have been passed on the sole ground of the absence of the petitioner however, it is not disputed by him that petitioner had been appearing before the trial Court. 7. I have heard learned co 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 accused can be prevented by sufficient reasons to put an appearance before necessarily cannot be construed as a deliberate and wi explanation offered for non therefore, the same is accepted. 9. While the scheme of crimin 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 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. 34598-2025 2 instant petition. It is contended that the impugned order aside on the ground of unintentional non-appearance of the petitioner It is also submitted that the petitioner the trial Court on each and every date. Notice of motion. Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana accepts notice for the respondent-State and submits that the impugned order passed on the sole ground of the absence of the petitioner however, it is not disputed by him that petitioner had 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 justified and, 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 maintain a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual 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. instant petition. It is contended that the impugned orders are liable to be set appearance of the petitioners. also submitted that the petitioners undertake to appear before Ms. Geeta Sharma, DAG, Haryana, who is present in Court, and submits that the impugned orders passed on the sole ground of the absence of the petitioners, however, it is not disputed by him that petitioners were already on bail and unsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of parties, the Many a times, the accused can be prevented by sufficient reasons 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, al 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 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. MANISHA 2025.07.07 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-34598 10. The sole purpose o presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner case have themselves trial Court on each and every date. 11. In view of t petition is allo 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P respectively), vide which cancelled and non 12. Petitioner period of four weeks their furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, along with costs of Rs. Welfare Funds, PGIMER, Chandigarh Court. 13. Receipt trial Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. 14. It is made clear that in case, petitioner trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this Court shall be deemed to be vacated. July 07, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 34598-2025 3 The sole purpose of issuance of non presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner have themselves come forward and have undertaken to appear before the trial Court on each and every date. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P vide which, the bail bonds and bail order of the petitioner cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued, are etitioners are directed to appear before the trial Court period of four weeks and on their doing so, they furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial ong with costs of Rs.10,000/- each to be deposited with Welfare Funds, PGIMER, Chandigarh for Receipts of payment of cost must be presented before learned Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. It is made clear that in case, petitioner 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 f issuance of non-bailable warrants is to secure presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioners in the present undertaken to appear before the he aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present wed. The impugned orders dated 05.10.2023, 13.05.2024, 03.06.2024, 17.08.2024, 07.03.2025, 19.04.2025, 25.04.2025, 09.05.2025, 23.05.2025, 05.06.2025, 12.06.2025 and 26.06.2025 (Annexures P-4 to P-15 the bail bonds and bail order of the petitioners were bailable warrants were issued, are hereby set aside. directed to appear before the trial Court within a they shall be admitted to bail on furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial to be deposited with Poor Patients for wasting precious time of the of payment of cost must be presented before learned Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. It is made clear that in case, petitioners fail to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.07.07 17:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment