Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Punjab and Haryana · body

2025 DAILYLAW 93651 (PNJ)

VICKY v. STATE OF HARYANA

CRM-M/46097/2025 · 2025-09-15

Sukhvinder Kaur

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 128 CRM-M-46097-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 15.09.2025. Vicky ...Petitioner. Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent. *** CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR ....... Present: Mr. Harsh Bargat, Advocate and Mr. Govind Arora, Advocate for the petitioner. *** SUKHVINDER KAUR , J. Present petition has been filed under Section 528, BNSS, 2023, for quashing of order dated 08.11.2024 (Annexure P2) passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Sonepat in case bearing No.CHI-756-2024 arising out of FIR No.17 dated 26.02.2024, under Sections 420, 476, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Cyber Sonipat, District Sonipat, vide which non bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner. The relevant facts of the present case for adjudication are that earlier the petitioner had been granted regular bail by learned trial Court vide order dated 03.06.2024. The petitioner could not appear before the trial Court on 08.11.2024 and his bail order as well as surety bonds were cancelled and forfeited to State and he was ordered to be summoned through non bailable warrants. Thereafter, the petitioner filed application for anticipatory bail before learned trial Court which was dismissed vide order dated 06.02.2025. Thereafter, the petitioner incorrectly filed revision KOMAL 2025.09.15 14:39 I attest to the accuracy of this document CRM-M-46097-2025 (O&M) -2- petition against order dated 08.11.2024, however the same was got dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh vide order dated 07.03.2025. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the absence of the petitioner on 08.11.2024 was not intentional rather the child of the counsel for the petitioner was not well and as such he was unable to inform the date to the petitioner, due to which he could not appear before the trial Court on the aforesaid date. He further submitted that now the matter is fixed for 20.01.2026 before learned trial Court and he is ready to surrender before the trial Court and requested that the impugned order dated 08.11.2024 be set aside. Heard. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and to enable the petitioner to join the proceedings pending before the trial Court and to expedite the proceedings in trial, the impugned order dated 08.11.2024 is set aside. The petitioner is directed to surrender and appear before the learned trial Court within 10 days and on doing so, he would be released on bail on furnishing his fresh bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Court concerned and with the undertaking to appear regularly before the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and subject to depositing of Rs.8,000/- with DLSA, Sonipat. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE 15.09.2025. Komal Whether speaking/reasoned? : Yes/ No Whether reportable? : Yes/ No KOMAL 2025.09.15 14:39 I attest to the accuracy of this document