Manpreet Singh Alias Monty v. State Of Punjab
-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-14341-2026 (O & M) Date of decision: 17.03.2026 Manpreet Singh @ Monty
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present :
Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocate for the petitioner. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing the order dated 18.12.2025, Annexure P-4, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, in case FIR No.32 dated 20.07.2017, vide which bail of the petitioner was cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued against him.
2.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was initially granted bail on 05.09.2017 whereafter he continued to regularly appear but for 18.12.2025 due to noting down of wrong next date of hearing whereafter he had appeared and now straight away non-bailable warrants have been issued vide the impugned order dated 18.12.2025. His absence is neither wilful nor deliberate and ready and willing to join the proceedings on or before the next date of hearing and prays for grant of one opportunity for him to surrender before the trial Court, even if the same is subject to costs.
3.
Notice of motion.
-24.
At the asking of the Court, Mr. Manipal Singh Atwal, DAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State and submits that the non-bailable warrants have been rightly issued against the petitioner, as he had absented from the proceedings.
5.
Heard.
6.
The very purpose of issuance of warrant of arrest, is to compel and secure the presence of the accused to face trial and establish the rule of law, as also to ensure finalization of the proceedings. 7.
This Court in CRM-M-36490-2022, titled as Major Singh vs. State of Punjab, decided on 15.09.2022, CRM-M-38277-2022, titled as Surjit Singh vs. State of Punjab, dated 26.08.2022 and CRM-M39000-2022, titled as Raghav vs. State of Punjab, decided on 09.09.2022, had set aside the orders of non-bailable warrants. 8.
Considering the fact that the absence of the petitioner was not wilful or deliberate and his readiness and willingness to surrender and join the proceedings, in case one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any of the parties, rather his joining the proceedings would help in expediting the trial. This Court in light of the judgment referred to above being applicable to the instant case, finds that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the present petition is allowed.
9.
In view of the afore-mentioned judgments and the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 18.12.2025, Annexure P-4, is set aside.
10.
He is directed to surrender before the trial Court on or before 30.03.2026 and on so doing, shall release him on bail subject to its
-3satisfaction and deposit costs of Rs.25,000/- to be deposited with Sai Aasra Paraplegic Rehab Centre (Kotak Mahindra Bank, Branch Sector 27 D, Chandigarh, Account No: 9612001641, IFSC: KKBK0004201. On furnishing bail/surety bonds, he is also directed to furnish undertaking by way of an affidavit that he will appear on each and every date of hearing before the trial Court, unless specifically exempted by the Court. He shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. The trial Court may impose any other condition that it may deem appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the present case.
11.
The petition is disposed of.
12.
Before parting with this order, it is made abundantly clear that in case the petitioner does not adhere to the aforesaid, the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed without any reference to this Court.
17.03.2026 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) ashok JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No Whether reportable : Yes / No