Back
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL
Harcharan Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sumeet Goel, J.
The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS of 2023 seeking quashing of the order dated 05.02.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bathinda vide which the bail granted to the petitioner has been cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued against him in CRA No.471 of 2018 titled as 'Harcharan Singh Vs. The Bathinda Central Cooperative Bank Limited etc.'
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the petitioner was convicted by the learned trial Court and held guilty for the commission of offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years or to pay compensation to complainant to the tune of cheque amount i.e. Rs.6,77,000/-alongwith interest @ 9% per annum from the date of issuance of cheque in question. On an appeal being preferred before the learned Sessions Judge, Bathinda, the sentence imposed upon the petitioner was ordered to be suspended and he was released on bail, vide order dated 11.09.2018 (Annexure P-2). According to the learned counsel, since then, the petitioner was regularly appearing before the
The cancellation of bail requires justifiable grounds, and mere absence from proceedings does not suffice for punitive measures.
The judgment emphasizes the need for courts to exercise discretion judiciously when issuing warrants, considering the principles of personal liberty and societal interest.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
