130 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 08.07.2025 Jabbar ..... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana .......Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BHARDWAJ Present: Mr. Nafeesh Ahmed, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Rajesh Bhardwaj, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer in the present petition is for quashing/setting aside of the impugned order dated 17.04.2025, vide which warrants of arrest have been issued against the petitioner in case No.SC/924/2019 titled as State of Haryana vs. Sajid.

2. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He submits that the petitioner was granted regular bail by learned Sessions Judge, Faridabad vide order dated 01.04.2020 and thereafter, he was regularly appearing before the trial Court. He submits that on 17.04.2025, the petitioner had gone to Jaipur, due to which he could not appear before the trial Court, however, his counsel filed an application for exemption from his personal appearance. He submits that learned trial Court has not considered the said application filed by the petitioner and his bail was cancelled and his bail/surety bonds were forfeited to the State and was ordered to be summoned through warrants of arrest vide order dated 17.04.2025. He submits that absence of the petitioner was totally unintentional and due to the circumstances beyond his control. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to appear before the trial Court and abide by all the terms and conditions, if any imposed by this Court.

3. Notice of motion.

4. Mr. Sumit Jain, Addl. AG, Haryana accepts notice on behalf of the State and has opposed the submissions made by counsel for the petitioner. He has submitted that learned trial Court has rightly cancelled the bail of the petitioner, as he intentionally did not appear before it, on the date fixed.

5. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that due to non-appearance of the petitioner on 17.04.2025, his bail was cancelled and his bail bonds/surety bonds were forfeited to the State and he was ordered to be summoned through warrants of arrest. The reason for non-appearance before the Court on the date fixed is that the petitioner was out of station. The Court without going into the authenticity of the ground taken for the absence of the petitioner, deems it appropriate to direct the petitioner to appear before the Court concerned to face the trial in the present case. In these circumstances, when the petitioner is ready to join the trial and face the proceedings, the order dated 17.04.2025 is set aside subject to payment of Rs.10,000/- as costs to be paid to Society for the Care of Blind, Sector-26, Chandigarh by the petitioner within period of seven days from today.

6. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court within a period of ten days from today and file an appropriate application alongwith receipt of abovesaid costs and the trial Court would grant him bail till the disposal of the case on his furnishing fresh bail/surety bonds to its satisfaction. The petitioner will have protection from arrest for a period of 10 days from today. The trial Court is free to impose any condition on the petitioner while admitting him to bail.

7. Needless to say that in case the petitioner fails to comply with the abovesaid direction, this order would be of no avail to him and the order dated 17.04.2025 will come in force and the present petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed.

8. Petition stands disposed of in abovesaid terms.

(RAJESH BHARDWAJ)

08.07.2025 JUDGE sharmila