IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 127 CRM-M-49182-2025 Date of decision : 04.09.2025 SANTOSH ...... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ...... RESPONDENT CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Present : Mr. Virender Soni, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Parveen Kumar Aggarwal, Addl. A.G, Haryana. ****** SURYA PARTAP SINGH . J.(Oral) 1. This is a petition filed by a surety, who has been served with a notice under Section 446 Cr.P.C. Since despite service of notice the petitioner did not appear before the trial Court, in order to procure her presence, the warrants of arrest has been issued against her. It is relevant to note here that the petitioner is not an accused in this case and therefore, she cannot be taken into custody. It is apparent on record that her warrants of arrest has been issued just for the sake of procuring her presence before the Court, so that proceeding under Section 446 Cr.P.C. can be taken up against her for the recovery of penalty, if imposed by the trial Court. There is no defect in the impugned order. VIPIN KUMAR 2025.09.05 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order CRM-M-49182-2025 2 2. Thus, no ground for interference in the impugned order is made out. Since there is no merit in the present petition, the same is hereby dismissed, accordingly. (SURYA PARTAP SINGH) JUDGE 04.09.2025 vipin Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether Reportable : No VIPIN KUMAR 2025.09.05 13:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this judgment/order