Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sunil Jaiswal vs State Of Haryana on 1 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:114808
CRM-M-43310-2023 2023:PHHC:114808
--1--
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
112
CRM-M-43310-2023
Date of decision: 01.09.2023
Sunil Jaiswal
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and another
...Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY
****
Present : Mr. Punit Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner
****
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for
quashing of impugned order dated 05.05.2022, Annexure P-2, passed by learned
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurugram, whereby the bail of the petitioner stands
cancelled and his bail and surety bonds were forfeited to the State, as well as order
dated 30.08.2022, Annexure P-4, passed by the trial Court, whereby he has been
declared proclaimed person in complaint case bearing No.NACT/4524/2015,
registered under Sections 138, 141, 142 of NI Act, 1881 and 420 IPC, Annexure
P-1.
2. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner had been granted regular
bail by the trial Court vide order dated 09.06.2017. Thereafter, he continued to
appear regularly before the trial Court but for 05.05.2022, on account of the fact
that he had noted the wrong date, which led to the cancellation of his bail and bail
bonds and surety bonds being forfeited to the State. Thereafter, he could not
appear as he was suffering from partial paralysis of his right side, copies of
medical documents are appended as Annexure P-3. Further, due to the outbreak of
1 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:114808
CRM-M-43310-2023 2023:PHHC:114808
--2--
Covid-19 pandemic, he again could not put in his appearance and was thereafter
guided by his counsel that he will get the notice to appear before the trial Court
and due to which reason he did not appear till date. His bail was cancelled and
warrants for arrest were issued in another FIR No.34, dated 30.01.2015, registered
under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC at Police Station Sector 56, Gurugram and
vide order dated 16.08.2023, Annexure P-5, this Court had subject to him
appearing before the trial Court, quashed the impugned orders. The absence of the
petitioner is neither wilful nor deliberate and on account of the reason aforesaid.
Further that he is ready and willing to join the proceedings for which he prays for
grant of one opportunity to surrender before the learned trial Court, even if the
same is subject to costs. Reliance is placed on the orders of this Court in CRM-M-
38277-2022 dated 26.08.2022, in the case of Surjit Singh vs. State of Punjab,
CRM-M-39000-2022, titled as Raghav vs. State of Punjab, decided on
09.09.2022 and CRM-M-36490-2022, titled as Major Singh vs. State of Punjab,
decided on 15.09.2022.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, Addl. AG, Haryana, who has appeared on
receipt of advance copy of the petition, opposes the same by submitting that the
impugned orders are legal and valid and have been rightly passed by the trial
Court on account of non-appearance of the petitioner.
5. No order prejudicial to the rights of the private respondent is being
proposed to be passed by this Court, thus, there is no requirement for the notice to
be issued to him.
6. Heard.
7. The very purpose of initiation of proclamation proceedings, is to
2 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:114808
CRM-M-43310-2023 2023:PHHC:114808
--3--
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.
8. Adverting to the facts of the present case, the reasons for non-
appearance of the petitioner that led to the passing of the impugned orders, appear
to be justified. At times, the accused can be prevented by sufficient reasons to put
an appearance before the Court and such an absence cannot necessarily be
construed as deliberate and wilful. However, it is incumbent upon him to join the
proceedings, before the trial Court, for the culmination of the same. 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. Thus,
in order to make the ends of justice meet and finding judgments referred to above
being applicable to the instant case, the present petition deserves to be allowed.
9. In view of the afore-referred orders and the facts and circumstances
of the case, the impugned orders dated 05.05.2022, Annexure P-2 as well as order
dated 30.08.2022, Annexure P-4 are set aside, subject to surrender by the
petitioner before the trial Court on or before 14.09.2023 subject to costs of
Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with the trial Court, which will forthwith be disbursed
to the complainant. He is allowed to remain on the same bail/ surety bonds as had
been furnished by him at the time for granting regular bail and the trial Court shall
release 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 trial Court, unless specifically exempted by the Court. He shall
not leave the country without prior permission of the Court. The trial Court may
3 of 4
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:114808
CRM-M-43310-2023 2023:PHHC:114808
--4--
impose any other condition that it may deem appropriate in the facts and
circumstances of the present case.
10. 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
01.09.2023
Ankur
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes / No
Whether reportable : Yes / No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:114808
4 of 4
