Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mandeep Kumar vs State Of Ut Chd on 6 September, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117368
2023:PHHC:117368
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
123
CRM-M-43583-2023 (O&M)
Date of Decision: 06.09.2023
MANDEEP KUMAR
... Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF UT CHD
... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL
Present: Mr. Neeraj Sansaniwal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
****
HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J.(Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for quashing the order dated
02.09.2022 (Annexure P-2) passed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Chandigarh, vide which the bail/surety bonds of the petitioner was
cancelled and forfeited to the State and his non-bailable warrants of arrest
were issued.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
was granted bail on 06.12.2021 and he was regularly appearing before
the trial Court; that, thereafter, the petitioner was arrested in an FIR
registered in Himachal Pradesh on 17.03.2022 and that the petitioner
remained in custody in Himachal Pradesh till 10.04.2023 and thus, it was
not possible for him to appear before the Court below on 02.09.2022. It
is, thus, contended that non-appearance of the petitioner was neither
intentional nor willful, but for the reasons explained above.
Notice of motion.
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117368
123 CRM-M-43583-2023 (O&M) -2-
On the asking of this Court, Mr. Deepinder Brar, Additional
PP UT Chandigarh, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-UT
Chandigarh. He submits that the petitioner was moving exemption
application one after the another and thus, it was for this reason that his
bail/surety bonds were cancelled on 02.09.2022.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
It is a case, wherein, the petitioner had been regularly
appearing before the Court, but he could not appear on a solitary date i.e.
02.09.2022, as he was in custody in some other case in Himachal Pradesh
and therefore, his non-appearance on the said date was unintentional.
The objective of the coercive mechanism prescribed under
the Code of Criminal Procedure is to ensure that the accused remains
present before the Court to receive the orders and judgments as are
passed qua the accused. If the accused shows his sincere intention and
desire to appear before the Court, then it would not be unjustified to
protect him from being arrested.
Though the petitioner absented himself from the Court
proceedings, yet he is now not required for any investigation or
interrogation purposes and rather, he is only to face the trial. Therefore,
no useful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner to custody.
Keeping in view the above fact, but without expressing any
opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition is allowed and the
order dated 02.09.2022 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Court below is
hereby set aside, qua the petitioner only.
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117368
123 CRM-M-43583-2023 (O&M) -3-
The petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial
Court/Duty Magistrate, on or before the date fixed before it i.e.
16.10.2023, subject to him depositing the costs of Rs.15,000/- with the
concerned District Legal Services Authority. On his doing so, the
petitioner shall be released on bail, subject to him furnishing the fresh
bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate
concerned.
06.09.2023 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
Aman Jain JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:117368
3 of 3
