Prem Singh v. State Of Haryana
CRM-M-25982-2026 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-25982-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 07.05.2026 Prem Singh ....Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY ***** Present :
Mr. Ashish Pannu, Advocate for the petitioner ***** AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1.
The present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing of order dated 09.04.2026 passed by learned JMIC, Charkhi Dadri, whereby the bail of the petitioner stands cancelled and forfeited to the State in COMI No.141 of 2017, under Sections 279, 337, 338, 304-A, 218, 34, 120-B IPC.
2.
Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was summoned in the criminal complaint, whereafter, he had furnished his bail bonds on 02.04.2026, Annexure P-3, however, due to exigency of work, he was unable to appear on 09.04.2026 as he was working as an Inspector in Haryana Police, posted at Sonepat, that led to cancellation of his bail and forfeiture of bail/surety bonds. Furthermore, in December, 2025 his son has also committed suicide. He has also filed anticipatory bail before the learned Additional Judge Charkhi Dadri, which was dismissed vide order dated 29.04.2026. His non-appearance was neither intentional nor deliberate but due to the aforesaid bona fide reason. He is ready and willing to join the proceedings and prays for grant of one opportunity for him to surrender before the trial Court, even if the same is subject to costs.
CRM-M-25982-2026 (O&M) 2 3.
Notice of motion.
4.
At the asking of the Court, 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 warrants 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, Surjit Singh vs. State of Punjab, dated 26.08.2022 and CRM-M-39000-2022, 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.
As a consequence of the aforesaid, the impugned order dated 09.04.2026, Annexure P-4 is set aside.
10.
The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court on or before 22.05.2026. On furnishing bail/surety bonds, the trial Court shall release
CRM-M-25982-2026 (O&M) 3 him on bail subject to its satisfaction. He is also directed to furnish an undertaking by way of an affidavit that he will appear on each and every date of hearing before the learned Appellate 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 present petition is accordingly allowed.
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. (AMAN CHAUDHARY) JUDGE 07.05.2026 M.Kamra Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes / No Whether reportable :
Yes / No