IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (146) CRM-M-28175-2026 Date of Decision: 27.07.2026 Rohit Chopra & Anr. --Petitioners Versus State of Punjab --Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH. Present:- Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. M.S. Bhullar, DAG, Punjab. *** SANJAY VASHISTH.J (Oral) 1. Instant petition, under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 482 Cr.P.C.), has been filed for quashing of the order dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure P-5), passed by Ld. Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amritsar, whereby after cancelling the bail of the petitioners, non-bailable warrants have been issued against them, on account of their non-appearance in case CHI-619-2022 titled as “State of Punjab Vs. Vishal Chopra and others” arising out of FIR No.0049 dated 04.05.2021 registered under Sections 323, 325, 379, 452, 148, 149 IPC and Sections 25, 27 of Arms Act at Police Station, Mohkampura, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR in question was registered in the year 2021 and petitioners were already on bail and were regularly appearing before the court concerned, however, due to ill health they could not appear on certain dates and consequently vide impugned order dated 15.09.2025 (Annexure P-5) their bail orders were cancelled and they were ordered to be summoned through non-bailable LUCKY 2026.07.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement High Court chandigarh CRM-M-28175-2026 -2- warrants. Petitioners even applied for grant of anticipatory bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar but the same was dismissed vide order dated 23.04.2026. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that the absence of the petitioners on the said date was neither intentional nor deliberate, but occurred due to bona fide reasons as explained above. 4. Learned Counsel further submits that now petitioners are ready to join the process of law, however, they be directed to be released on bail, on their surrendering before the Court and thus, be protected from arrest. In case, one opportunity is granted, petitioners also undertake that they would not absent themselves in future, without there being prior permission from the Court, and fully cooperate for early disposal of the trial. 5. Notice of motion. 6. On the asking of the Court, Mr. M.S. Bhullar, DAG, Punjab accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and opposes the request of the petitioners by submitting that petitioners do not deserve any sympathy, because, they have misused the concession of bail granted by the Court. Learned State counsel by pointing out the irresponsible conduct of the petitioner, submits that there is every possibility that for the purpose of delaying the trial, they would again be absenting during the proceedings. 7. In number of cases, wherein, accused stopped appearing in criminal cases after being released on bail and thereby compelling the Court to issue non-bailable warrants by cancelling the bail already granted or such accused is declared ‘Proclaimed Person’/Proclaimed Offender’, after examining the facts, this Court has formulated to apply a uniform method by satisfying itself that such accused would appear before the concerned Court, LUCKY 2026.07.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement High Court chandigarh CRM-M-28175-2026 -3- to enable it to proceed further instead of delaying the proceedings to await the presence of accused. Intentional or unintentional default of the accused can be dealt with by examining the facts from case to case in which he is involved, and where it is realised that absence or prolonged absence of such accused is intentional to evade the process of law, he/she can be penalized after examining the nature of crime in which he is facing the proceedings and thereupon by imposing some cost amount subject to his/her capacity to pay. Primary object of every Court is only to examine the commission of crime in question before it, vis a vis, the person/accused, who is subjected to such proceedings, and if possible justice be imparted at the earliest without unnecessary delay. It is not expected that undue time would be devoted in securing the presence of absconded accused and also to waste energy by enforcing the special mechanism to arrest such accused. Considering all such aspects, this Court in the case of Ashish Kumar Honda @ Ashish Handa Vs. State of Punjab, 2022 (4) RCR (criminal) 765; Law Finder Doc Id # 20238111 considered similar plea of appearance, expressed at the instance of the accused, who failed to appear before the Court at appropriate time, and observed that: “paramount consideration of the Court is to secure presence of accused on each and every date for speeding up the trial for its final conclusion. Already Courts are flooded with so much litigation, resulting in slow pace of work, because of more than one reason. The required energy and manpower be used for expediting the proceedings of the Court, instead of running after the accused persons to get hold of them.” LUCKY 2026.07.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement High Court chandigarh CRM-M-28175-2026 -4- Again, this Court has considered the aforementioned similar plea in case Veena @ Veena Devi v. State of Punjab (CRM-M-2206- 2025, decided on 16.01.2025. 8. I have considered the submissions of both the sides and examined the relevant material available on record. The petitioners have remissed in appearing before the Court due to some unavoidable circumstances, and consequently, on 15.09.2025, impugned order cancelling the bail and issuance of non-bailable warrants of arrest, has been passed against them. It also cannot be left unnoticed that on coming to know about passing of the impugned order, petitioners have moved the present petition, showing their inclination to submit themselves before the trial Court. 9. In totality of circumstances, I am of the view that the petitioners can be given one chance to appear before the trial Court, so that proceedings may restart and continue in smooth manner. Accordingly, plea of the petitioners is accepted. Impugned order dated 15.09.2025 (P-5) is hereby set aside to the extent of issuance of non-bailable warrants against the petitioners, and are directed to be released on bail, in the eventuality of surrender by them before the trial Court on or before 07.08.2026. The petitioners shall also furnish fresh bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, in case the bail bonds have already been forfeited. Besides, petitioners would also submit specific undertaking/affidavit that they will keep appearing during the proceedings of the trial in future and the proceedings would not be delayed because of their conduct. However, this order shall be subject to the payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs, to be deposited by each of the petitioners in an Old LUCKY 2026.07.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement High Court chandigarh Age CRM-M-28175-2026 -5- Home of the area, as may be decided by the learned Trial Court. The Trial Court shall also specify the time frame within which such costs will be required to be deposited, but not more than two weeks, failing which this order would not be of any advantage to the petitioners. 10. With aforementioned terms, present petition stands disposed of. Misc. application(s), if any, also stand disposed of. 27.07.2026 (SANJAY VASHISTH) lucky JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether Reportable: Yes/No LUCKY 2026.07.29 10:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgement High Court chandigarh