← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/29691/2026disposed of

Baljit Kaur v. State Of Punjab

2026-05-22Mr. Justice Rajesh Bhardwaj3 pages

CRM-M No.29691 of 2026 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.29691 of 2026 Date of decision: 22.05.2026 Baljit Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ..... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ ***** Present :- Mr. Zubin Chhura, Advocate for the petitioner.

**** RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral) 1.

Present petition has been filed praying for quashing/setting aside the impugned order dated 10.02.2026 (Annexure P-3) whereby bail bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner in a case bearing FIR No.178, dated 11.10.2023, under Sections 384, 436, 120-B, 427 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kotkapura City, District Faridkot, Punjab. 2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was falsely prosecuted in a case bearing FIR No.178, dated 11.10.2023, under Sections 384, 436, 120-B, 427 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kotkapura City, District Faridkot, Punjab. He has submitted that after registration of the FIR, the petitioner was granted the concession of anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 17.04.2025. He has submitted that after granting the concession of anticipatory bail, the petitioner was regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. He has submitted that though the petitioner was granted the concession of

connection with another case, she was arrested on 29.01.2026 and now she is presently on bail. He has submitted that it is because of the same, the petitioner could not appear before the learned trial Court on the date fixed before it, i.e. 10.02.2026. He has further submitted that due to nonappearance of the petitioner before the learned trial Court on 10.02.2026, her bail order was cancelled and bail bonds & surety bonds were also cancelled and forfeited to the State. He has further submitted that non bailable warrant of arrest was also issued against the petitioner. He has submitted that absence of the petitioner was bona fide and not intentional. He has further submitted that the petitioner is ready to appear before the learned trial Court and abide by the terms and conditions imposed upon her.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

On the asking of the Court, Mr. Ekompal Sagoo, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He, on the other hand, has contended that bail order of the petitioner was rightly cancelled by the learned trial Court and non bailable warrant of arrest was issued against her, as she failed to appear in the Court without any valid reason.

5.

I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6.

It is apparent that the petitioner was prosecuted in a case bearing FIR No.178, dated 11.10.2023, under Sections 384, 436, 120-B, 427 of IPC, registered at Police Station Kotkapura City, District Faridkot, Punjab, in which, he was already granted the concession of anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court vide order dated 17.04.2025. Due to non-

was cancelled and bail bonds/surety bonds were forfeited to the State. Non bailable warrant of arrest was also issued against the petitioner. The reason given by the petitioner for her absence is that she is already behind bars in some other case. As the petitioner is keen to join the proceedings, so keeping in view the abovesaid facts, the present petition is disposed of and the impugned order dated 10.02.2026 is hereby set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs.10,000/- to be deposited with the Spinal Rehab Centre, Sector 28-A, Madhya Marg, Chandigarh by the petitioner within a period of 07 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

In case, the petitioner appears and surrenders before the Court concerned within a period of 10 days from the date of certified copy of this order and files an application for bail alongwith receipt of abovesaid costs, the Court concerned is directed to admit her to bail subject to its satisfaction and proceed with the trial in accordance with law. The petitioner will have protection from arrest for a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 7.

Needless to say that in case the petitioner fails to comply with the abovesaid direction, she will have no benefit of abovesaid protection granted by this Court and order under challenge dated 10.02.2026 would come in force and the present petition would be deemed to have been dismissed.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ) 22.05.2026 JUDGE rittu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No