Haider v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.05.2026 HAIDER ... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE OF PUNJAB ... RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL PresentMr. Dipanshu Kapur, Advocate for the petitioner. (through video conferencing) H.S. GREWAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS (482 Cr.P.C.) for setting aside the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure P/2) vide which the bail granted to the petitioner has been cancelled and forfeited to the State and further, non-bailable warrants of arrest were issued on account of non-appearance before the Ld. Trial Court in FIR No. 38, dated 01.04.2024, under Sections 379, 34, 411 and 201 of IPC (corresponding Section 303 (2), 3 (5), 317 & 238 BNS), P.S. Fatehgarh Sahib and further, for allowing the petitioner to appear before the Ld. Trial Court and on his appearance, he be released on bail on furnishing requisite bail/surety bonds and/or to issue any other appropriate order or direction to allow the petitioner to comply with the order dated 27.11.2025 passed by the Ld. Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib (Annexure P/4) and to deposit the cost as imposed by the trial Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was initially granted regular bail in the said FIR and had been regularly appearing before the Trial Court; however, due to non-appearance on a subsequent date, his bail was cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued and bail bonds were ordered to be forfeited to the State. It is submitted that the petitioner thereafter obtained anticipatory bail from the Sessions Court, atehgarh Sahib with a direction to surrender and deposit costs of Rs.10,000/-, but he could not comply with the same as he was not informed about the order by his counsel and was also unable to appear due to his work as a truck cleaner, often being out of the State. Consequently, repeated notices and non-bailable warrants were issued, and proceedings qua the petitioner were separated. It is further submitted that the petitioner is now ready and willing to appear before the Trial Court and to deposit the imposed costs, and therefore, the impugned order deserves to be set aside and the petitioner be permitted to join proceedings and be released on bail. 3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Parneet Singh Pandher, A.A.G., Punjab accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. 5.

I have heard the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the case file. 6.

Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has not appeared before the learned trial Court and an application was filed for exemption from personal appearance on the ground that he was admitted in the Punjab Health Systems Corporation Centre, Sirhind for De-addiction treatment and the personal appearance of the petitioner was exempted for that day only and bailable warrants were issued to the petitioner. However, the petitioner did not appear and nor any application was made on his behalf. Therefore, the

learned trial Court had no option but to issue non-bailable warrants of arrest of the petitioner for 29.10.2025. The petitioner has not been able to give any plausible reasons for his non-appearance before the learned trial Court. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I find no infirmity with the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 passed by the learned trial Court. Consequently, the present petition stands dismissed. (H.S.GREWAL) 01.05.2026 JUDGE Janki Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No