CRM-M-35620 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (166) Shahrukh Khan State of Haryana CORAM: Present: ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) 1. 27.02.2026 Sessions Judge, cancelled and his bail/surety bonds have been forfeited and were issued against the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 17.11.2020 Dabwali Sadar, District Sirsa 2. was granted the concession of bail by the FIR on 05.01.2021 noted a wrong date of hearing as which, the petitioner could not appear on very first date of his non -1- 35620-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Shahrukh Khan Versus State of Haryana HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN **** Mr. Vishal Sharda, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Swati Batra, Sr. DAG, Haryana. **** ALOK JAIN, J. (Oral) The present petition is for quashing of (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa, whereby bail order of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail/surety bonds have been forfeited and were issued against the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. under Sections 15(b) of NDPS Act Dabwali Sadar, District Sirsa. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted the concession of bail by the learned 05.01.2021 (Annexure P-2) but during the trial, the petitioner had noted a wrong date of hearing as 27.03.2026 which, the petitioner could not appear on very first date of his non-appearance, his IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-35620-2026 Date of Decision:- 06.07.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondent ALOK JAIN Mr. Vishal Sharda, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Swati Batra, Sr. DAG, Haryana. The present petition is for quashing of impugned order dated ) passed by learned Additional District and whereby bail order of the petitioner has been cancelled and his bail/surety bonds have been forfeited and arrest warrants were issued against the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.394 dated 15(b) of NDPS Act, registered at Police Station Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner learned trial Court in the present 2) but during the trial, the petitioner had 27.03.2026 instead of 27.02.2026 due to which, the petitioner could not appear on 27.02.2026. However, on the appearance, his bail was cancelled and the 06.07.2026 ……Petitioner ……Respondent order dated Additional District and whereby bail order of the petitioner has been arrest warrants dated , registered at Police Station Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner trial Court in the present 2) but during the trial, the petitioner had due to . However, on the and the MANJU 2026.07.08 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35620 impugned order and willing to surrender before the learned trial Court and join proceedings, if he is granted one opportunity to do so. Learned counsel further submit that the petitioner undertakes to appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and to abide by all the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court or by learned trial Court. 3. advance notice, submits that the absence of the petitioner has procrastinated the trial and, hence, the order is well within the legal parameters. Learned State counsel further submits that the matter is now fixed before the learned trial Court on 4. motion will further procrastinate the trial, the present petition is adjudicated in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of “Krishna Sharma @ Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. The State of West Bengal and another” which reads as under: -2- 35620-2026 impugned order was passed. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to surrender before the learned trial Court and join proceedings, if he is granted one opportunity to do so. Learned counsel further submit that the petitioner undertakes to appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and to abide by all the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court or by learned trial Court. Learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the State advance notice, submits that the absence of the petitioner has procrastinated the trial and, hence, the order is well within the legal parameters. Learned State counsel further submits that the matter is now fixed before the learned trial Court on 13.10.2026 for further proceedings. Considering the order to be passed, and issuance of notice of motion will further procrastinate the trial, the present petition is adjudicated in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of shna Sharma @ Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. The State of West Bengal and another” SLP (Crl.) No. 12829 of 2023, which reads as under: “However, we find that merely because the appellant did not appear personally could not have been a ground for cancellation of bail. The parameters for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are totally different. The bail already granted may be cancelled, that the person who has been granted the benefit of bail has violated any of the conditions or misused the liberty by influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence.” was passed. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to surrender before the learned trial Court and join proceedings, if he is granted one opportunity to do so. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner undertakes to appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and to abide by all the terms and conditions to be imposed by this Court or by learned trial Court. Learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the State on advance notice, submits that the absence of the petitioner has procrastinated the trial and, hence, the order is well within the legal parameters. Learned State counsel further submits that the matter is now fixed before the learned for further proceedings. Considering the order to be passed, and issuance of notice of motion will further procrastinate the trial, the present petition is adjudicated in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of shna Sharma @ Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. The State of West SLP (Crl.) No. 12829 of 2023, the relevant extract of However, we find that merely because the appellant did not appear personally could not have been a ground for cancellation of bail. The parameters for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are totally different. The bail already granted may be cancelled, if it is found person who has been granted the benefit of bail has violated any of the conditions or misused the liberty by influencing the witnesses or tampering with the was passed. It is further submitted that petitioner is ready and willing to surrender before the learned trial Court and join proceedings, s that the petitioner undertakes to appear on each and every date before the learned trial court and to abide by all the terms and conditions to be on advance notice, submits that the absence of the petitioner has procrastinated the trial and, hence, the order is well within the legal parameters. Learned State counsel further submits that the matter is now fixed before the learned Considering the order to be passed, and issuance of notice of motion will further procrastinate the trial, the present petition is adjudicated in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of shna Sharma @ Krishna Kumar Sharma Vs. The State of West the relevant extract of MANJU 2026.07.08 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-35620 5. appearing before the learned trial Court but on appear as he wrongly noted the date, it appears that there was no intention on his part to remain absent. Moreover, the petitioner is ready and willing to surrender and join the proc conditions imposed by this Court or by the learned trial Court. In case, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any party, rather his joining the proceedings would ensur proceedings. 6. law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court cited supra directed to surrend released on bail by furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. 7. and the petitioner is imposed with a cost of Rs. the concerned DLSA before the learned trial Court. July 06, 2026 manju Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: -3- 35620-2026 Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court but on appear as he wrongly noted the date, it appears that there was no intention on his part to remain absent. Moreover, the petitioner is ready and willing to surrender and join the proceedings and also to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court or by the learned trial Court. In case, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any party, rather his joining the proceedings would ensur proceedings. In light of the above factual matrix and considering the ratio of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court cited supra directed to surrender on or before the trial Court on leased on bail by furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. In light of the above, the present petition stands disposed of and the petitioner is imposed with a cost of Rs. the concerned DLSA before the learned trial Court. July 06, 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court but on 27.02.2026, he could not appear as he wrongly noted the date, it appears that there was no intention on his part to remain absent. Moreover, the petitioner is ready and willing eedings and also to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court or by the learned trial Court. In case, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any party, rather his joining the proceedings would ensure finalization of In light of the above factual matrix and considering the ratio of law as laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court cited supra, the petitioner is the trial Court on 13.10.2026 and shall be leased on bail by furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate concerned. In light of the above, the present petition stands disposed of and the petitioner is imposed with a cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the concerned DLSA before the learned trial Court. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner was regularly , he could not appear as he wrongly noted the date, it appears that there was no intention on his part to remain absent. Moreover, the petitioner is ready and willing eedings and also to abide by all the terms and conditions imposed by this Court or by the learned trial Court. In case, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any e finalization of In light of the above factual matrix and considering the ratio of , the petitioner is and shall be leased on bail by furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the In light of the above, the present petition stands disposed of with MANJU 2026.07.08 14:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document