Vinod Kumar v. State Of Haryana

CRM-M-48773-2025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-48773-2025 Date of decision: 02.09.2025 Vinod Kumar

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE AARADHNA SAWHNEY Present :

Mr. Lovepreet Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** AARADHNA SAWHNEY, J.(ORAL) 1.

Petitioner, an accused in case FIR No.55 dated 03.02.2024 registered against him for commission of offence punishable under Sections 506, 341, 325, 323, 148, 149, 147 IPC (Section 307 IPC added later on), has prayed for quashing of orders dated 23.07.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide which application seeking exemption from appearing in the Court, moved on his (P) behalf was dismissed, his bail was cancelled. Personal bonds, surety bonds were also cancelled and forfeited to state. His presence was sought to be procured through non-bailable warrants. 2.

Learned counsel submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. No overt act has been attributed to him in the entire incident. The present FIR is a counterblast to the earlier FIR lodged by the petitioner. Continuing further, learned counsel submits that in the present case registered against petitioner, he (P) was arrested on 04.09.2024 and was extended the concession of bail by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirsa, in terms of order dated 03.01.2025. Petitioner appeared in the Court on 20.02.2025, but no proceedings took place on the said day and thus, the matter was adjourned to 18.04.2025. Unfortunately, petitioner lost his real brother and thus, could not appear before the Court on 18.04.2025, as such an application seeking his personal exemption from appearing in the Court HAMANT 2025.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CRM-M-48773-2025 was moved, which was allowed. The case was adjourned to 21.05.2025. Since the Presiding Officer was on leave, the matter was taken up and adjourned to 08.07.2025, on which day again an application was filed on his behalf seeking his exemption from appearing in the Court. The same was allowed and the case was adjourned to 23.07.2025. Taking his submissions further, learned counsel submits that on account of wrong noting of the date by the clerk of the counsel representing the petitioner before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa, petitioner could not appear on the date actually fixed i.e. on 23.07.2025. The absence of petitioner was not intentional but was on account of the aforesaid reason. However, when an application for exemption was moved on 23.07.2025, the same was dismissed by the learned Court.

Consequently, the bail of the petitioner was cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued for 26.08.2025. Learned counsel prays for taking a lenient view in favour of the petitioner by setting aside the order dated 23.07.2025 and further submits that petitioner undertakes to appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge on each and every date of hearing.

3. Heard.

4.

The present petition is disposed of with a direction to petitioner to appear before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sirsa within a period of 15 days. On his appearance, if petitioner moves an application for grant of bail, the same be decided expeditiously.

(AARADHNA SAWHNEY) JUDGE 02.09.2025 Hemant Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes / No Whether reportable :

Yes / No HAMANT 2025.09.03 19:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document