Punjab-Haryana High Court
Bashir Khan vs State Of Punjab on 30 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
130
CRM-M-45371-2022
Decided on : 30.09.2022
Bashir Khan
. . . Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Punjab
. . . Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
PRESENT: Mr. Ashok Kumar Sama, Advocate
for the petitioner(s).
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 05.08.2022 (Annexure P-3),
passed by Ld. Additional Sessions Judge-I, Fazilka, in case FIR No. 112,
dated 18.06.2015, under Sections 279, 304-A of IPC, registered at Police
Station Sadar Fazilka, District Fazilka, vide which the bail granted to the
petitioner is cancelled and non-bailable warrants of arrest has been issued on
account of non-appearance on 05.08.2022.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the time of
registration of FIR i.e. 18.06.2015, petitioner has been appearing before the
trial Court till its final conclusion. Thereafter, on petitioner being convicted
in the year 2017, an appeal was filed by him before the Ld. Appellate Court
and during the pendency of the appeal, operation of the order of sentence was
suspended while granting bail to the petitioner vide order dated 15.11.2017.
He further submits that since the time of granting bail by the Ld. Appellate
Court, petitioner never defaulted in appearance before the Ld. Appellate
Court and in all these five years, petitioner has been regularly appearing in
JAWALA RAM
2022.10.01 15:46
the proceedings of the appeal also. However, due to recording of incorrect
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
date of the listing of the appeal before the Ld. Appellate Court, petitioner
could not appear on 05.08.2022 and consequently, his bail was cancelled.
The detailed reasons have been explained in para No.12 of the present
petition, which says as under:-
"12. That petitioner is a poor person and sole bread winner of
the family and resident of Rajasthan which is approximately 260
KMs from the District Court Fazilka and petitioner appeared on
each and every date before the impugned order dated
05.08.2022 and the same mistaken has been taken place due to
the error of writing wrong date, therefore, petitioner is
requesting to quash the impugned order and seeking direction to
the Ld. Appellate Court, Fazilka to allow the petitioner to
furnish afresh bail bonds/surety bonds, otherwise, petitioner will
suffer immense loss and irreparable injury."
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that from the
fact that since 2017, petitioner never failed in his duty to appear before the
Court and even during the pendency of the present appeal, except of one
chance, itself sufficient to show that petitioner's absence was not because of
any motive or hidden reason. Another noticable aspect is that impugned
order for cancellation of bail is of 05.08.2022 and immediately, thereafter,
present petition has been filed before this Court.
Notice of motion.
On asking of the Court, Mr. AS Sandhu, AAG, Punjab, who is
present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State.
A copy of the complete paper book has been supplied to him by
learned counsel for the petitioner.
Learned State counsel while opposing the contentions of the
learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that petitioner does not deserve
any sympathy because already granted concession of bail by the Ld.
JAWALA RAM
2022.10.01 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
Appellate Court, has been misused by him. Therefore, impugned order dated
05.08.2022 (P-3), is as per law, and should not be interfered with, and
petitioner should be directed to surrender before the Ld. Appellate Court.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
relevant material on record.
While considering the arguments addressed by learned counsel
for the petitioner, this Court is of the view that petitioner is facing
proceedings of investigation, and thereafter trial, since the date of registration
of FIR i.e. 18.06.2015, and after being convicted by the Ld. Trial Court, was
also granted bail by the Ld. Appellate Court and there is nothing mentioning
in the impugned order dated 05.08.2022 (P-3) that he ever misused the
concession of bail.
In such a situation and also relying upon the submissions of
learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court has no reason to disbelieve that
absence of the petitioner before the Ld. Appellate Court was due to any
hidden motive or some other consideration. Further, approaching this Court
against the impugned order dated 05.08.2022 (P-3) also says that the intent of
the petitioner is also not to avoid the proceedings of the Court.
Accordingly, in the back drop of the aforementioned facts and
circumstances and submissions recorded hereinabove, I am of the view that
one opportunity can be granted to the petitioner to appear before the Ld.
Appellate Court and then granting of bail only for the purpose of securing his
presence and speeding up the proceeding of appeal, which is pending since
long.
Therefore, it is directed that if petitioner on his own appears
before the Ld. Appellate Court on or before 17.10.2022, he would be released
on bail subject to his furnishing fresh bail bonds/surety bonds to the
JAWALA RAM
2022.10.01 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
satisfaction of the Ld. Appellate Court. Besides, petitioner would submit
specific undertaking/affidavit that he will keep appearing during the
proceedings of the trial in future and the proceedings would not be delayed
because of his conduct.
In view of above, the present petition is allowed.
Needless to mention here that on compliance of all the
conditions mentioned hereinabove, impugned order dated 05.08.2022
(Annexure P-3) and the subsequent orders would become inoperative qua the
petitioner.
(SANJAY VASHISTH)
JUDGE
September 30, 2022
J.Ram
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
JAWALA RAM
2022.10.01 15:46
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment.
