Divanshu And ANR v. State Of Punjab

CRM-M-43661-2025 (O&M) -1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-43661-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision : 15.09.2025 DIVANSHU AND ANR .... PETITIONERS V/S STATE OF PUNJAB .... RESPONDENT CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHAS MEHLA Present :

Mr.Akram Hussain, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Punjab. **** SUBHAS MEHLA, J. (Oral) 1.

The instant petition has been filed for setting aside of order dated 25.07.2025 (Annexure P-15) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTSC, SAS Nagar, Mohali whereby non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioners.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the impugned order is arbitrary, mechanical and contrary to settled principles of law. It was argued that the petitioners have regularly appeared before the learned Trial Court on almost all dates of hearing and their absence on 23.05.2025 and 10.07.2025 was due to personal difficulties. It was further submitted that neither the petitioners have attempted to abscond nor they misused the concession of bail.

3.

Notice of motion.

Anju Goel 2025.09.16 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh

CRM-M-43661-2025 (O&M) -24.

Mr. Subhash Godara, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, accepted notice on behalf of respondent-State and opposed the petition by submitting that the petitioners failed to appear before the learned trial Court on more than one occasion without any prior intimation or sufficient cause. Learned counsel further stated that there is no illegality in the order passed by the learned trial Court and the present petition deserves to be dismissed. 5.

Heard.

6.

Keeping in view the fact that a notice was issued to the petitioners when they failed to appear before the trial Court but despite notice, they again failed to appear on 25.07.2025. On 25.07.2025, nonbailable warrants were issued for 11.08.2025 and even on 11.08.2025, they also failed to appear, this Court finds no ground to interfere in the impugned order. Accordingly, the petition, being devoid of merit, is dismissed. (SUBHAS MEHLA) JUDGE 15.09.2025 anju Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No Anju Goel 2025.09.16 15:22 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh