Sandeep Singh v. State Of Punjab


  
 

  !




    

 "#$

 $%&'& ()) 



    
    


 *+) ,
),),- .

 

   
         ),),- .

 / )01"23     !    
  "#$  %

%  &    '    (         )* ) $)$+ , -  .+/     !!  ( !      '

 ! 
  0    !      12  3  4#    )5

$)$)
 +54.62 %,
 " 2 %& ! /    !
       !

$

7  !                 &    !! 5 $ $)$)'

% 
0    !  , - .$/

8&   99      !   )* ) $)$+ !& !!! '&     
 7!   '


    !! 9   !  

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of Court,  2


 &!

  

 accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State. 5.

Mr. Sabharwal, has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner was involved in one more criminal case and intentionally did not appear before the trial Court. He further contends that a person, who is evading the process of law, is not entitled to any concession from this Court and the present petition is liable to be dismissed. 6.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7.

From the perusal of the impugned order (Annexure P-3), it is apparent that on 06.01.2023, neither the petitioner appeared in person nor his counsel was present before the trial Court. Consequently, the Court was left with no other option except to cancel his bail order and to order forfeiture of bail bonds and surety bonds. Even, this Court finds that the impugned order passed by the trial Court is perfectly legal and no illegality has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

8.

At this stage, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner is a young boy aged about 27


   years and is a labourer. 8    !  &9'

 :    '9' !!

       '9  

;

)))<.

&   !!  8'8

% 6%!:=  & )$&:9 '

      &  )$&:    !!9

 !

     !< '    

    !!!!  

    !!  '     !! 9   !&  9 %

    !  %   !!  !      ! '    9  

  9'9    

#

      ))  0),),- .

3 9     > <:  ?<3 >  ! ?<3