Cancellation of bail and forfeiture of bonds is not justified when the accused's non-appearance in court is bona fide, specifically when the accused is already in custody in another criminal case.

RAJESH BHARDWAJ , J. (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed praying for quashing of impugned order dated 05.05.2026 (Annexure P-5) passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gurdaspur, whereby the bail bonds and surety bonds of the petitioner have been cancelled and forfeited to the State and non-bailable warrants have been issued against the petitioner in case bearing FIR No.185, dated 27.06.2025, under Section 103 BNS (Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act and Sections 113(2), 249-A, 253-A and 61(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Gurdaspur. Further prayer has been made that the petitioner be ordered to be admitted to bail in the event of his appearance before the learned trial Court.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was falsely prosecuted in a case bearing FIR No.185, dated 27.06.2025, under Section 103 BNS (Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act and Sections 113(2), 249-A, 253-A and 61(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Gurdaspur. He has submitted that after registration of the FIR, the petitioner was granted the concession of regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 17.03.2026 passed in CRM-M-54583-2025. He has submitted that though the petitioner was granted the concession of regular bail by this Court in the present case, however, he was already behind bars in another case bearing FIR No.325, dated 17.12.2025 in which he was granted bail on 20.04.2026. He has submitted that it is because of the same, the petitioner could not appear before the learned trial Court on the date fixed before it, i.e. 05.05.2026. He has further submitted that due to non-appearance of the petitioner before the learned trial Court on 05.05.2026, his bail order was cancelled and bail bonds & surety bonds were also cancelled and forfeited to the State. He has further submitted that non bailable warrants were also issued against the petitioner. He has submitted that absence of the petitioner was bona fide and not intentional. He has further submitted that the petitioner is ready to appear before the learned trial Court and abide by the terms and conditions imposed upon him.

3. Notice of motion.

4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. Ekompal Sagoo, AAG, Punjab appears and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. He, on the other hand, has contended that bail order of the petitioner was rightly cancelled by the learned trial Court and non bailable warrants were issued against him, as he failed to appear in the Court without any valid reason.

5. I have heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. It is apparent that the petitioner was prosecuted in a case bearing FIR No.185, dated 27.06.2025, under Section 103 BNS (Sections 25/54/59 of Arms Act and Sections 113(2), 249-A, 253-A and 61(2) of BNS added later on), registered at Police Station Civil Lines Batala, District Gurdaspur, in which, he was already granted the concession of regular bail by this Hon’ble Court vide order dated 17.03.2026. However, the petitioner was already behind bars in another case bearing FIR No.325 dated 17.12.2025 and thus, due to his non-appearance before the learned trial Court, his bail order was cancelled and bail bonds/surety bonds were forfeited to the State. Non bailable warrants were also issued against the petitioner. The reason given by the petitioner for his absence is that he is already behind bars in some another case bearing FIR No.325, dated 17.12.2025. As the petitioner is keen to join the proceedings, so keeping in view the abovesaid facts, the present petition stands disposed of and t