← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/20960/2022disposed of

Ajay Kumar @ Aju v. State Of Punjab

2024-03-21Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain2 pages

CRM-M-20960-2022 2024:PHHC:041160

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-20960-2022 Date of decision : 21.03.2024 Ajay Kumar @ Aju ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ....Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ JAIN Present :

Mr. Barjinder Singh, Advocate for Mr. Prateek Pandit, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Arora, DAG, Punjab.

PANKAJ JAIN, J. (ORAL) On 16.05.2022, the following order was passed :- "Present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of order dated 11.2.2022 (Annexure P8) passed by the trial Court in FIR No.12 dated 13.1.2018 registered under Section 21/22 of NDPS Act at Police Satition Katarpur District Jalandhar whereby the learned trial Court cancelled the bail of the petitioner and directed to summon the petitioner through non-bailable warrants. The counsel contends that the petitioner is facing trail in a case relating to non-commerical quantity of contraband and earlier he was released on regular bail vide order 23.2.2018 (Annexure P-2) and he was regularly appearing before the trial Court. It is further contended that on 11.2.2022 the petitioner failed to appear before the trial Court as wrong date was noted by his counsel and the same was conveyed to him. Notice of motion.

Deepak Kumar 2024.04.02 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-20960-2022 2024:PHHC:041160 On the asking of the Court, Ms. Samina Dhir, DAG, accepts notice on behalf of State of Punjab and on instructions from ASI Jagjit Singh has not refuted the fact that petitioner jumped bail on 11.2.2022.

Now be listed on 23.9.2022.

In the meantime, In the meanwhile, the petitioner to appear before the trial Court on or before the next date of hearing fixed there and on his appearance, he is directed to be released on interim bail by the Court concerned subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the said Court." 2.

Today, Ld. Counsel submits that pursuant to the aforesaid order, the petitioner has appeared before the Trial Court and has been admitted to bail.

3.

State Counsel does not dispute the aforesaid fact. 4.

In view of above, the impugned order dated 11.02.2022 has lost its sting and relevance.

5.

Since the petitioner is now before the law, this Court finds that no further order is required to be passed and no further action shall be taken on the impugned order.

6.

The petition stands disposed off accordingly. March 21, 2024 (Pankaj Jain) Dpr Judge Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No Deepak Kumar 2024.04.02 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document