Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 3]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Krishan Kumar @ Krishania vs State Of U.T on 8 September, 2011

Author: Rakesh Kumar Jain

Bench: Rakesh Kumar Jain

CRM-M-27267-2011 (O&M)                                                     [1]
                                  :::::::::

 IN TH E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH


                                               CRM-M-27267-2011 (O&M)
                                               Date of decision:08.09.2011

Krishan Kumar @ Krishania                                          ...Petitioner
                                  Versus
State of U.T., Chandigarh                                        ...Respondent



CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN


Present:    Mr. Ashish K. Gupta, Advocate,
            for the petitioner.
                  *****

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (Oral)

This is a petition for grant of pre-arrest bail in a case registered vide FIR No.239 dated 03.06.2009, under Section 21 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Sector 39, Chandigarh.

The petitioner was on bail. On 21.03.2011, the following order was passed by the learned Trial Court before lunch:-

"Present: Smt. Ritu Jain, P.P. for the State.
None for accused.
***** Accused is not present, none appeared on his behalf, despite calling the case several times, since morning. It is already 12.50 p.m. but none appeared for accused. Two witnesses namely Narinder Kumar and Massa Singh are also present.
Now case be called again after lunch.
Sd/-
JSC/21.03.2011"

After lunch, the following order was passed by the learned Trial Court: -

"Present: Smt. Ritu Jain, P.P. for the State.
None for accused.
***** Case called again but none appeared for CRM-M-27267-2011 (O&M) [2] :::::::::
accused. Both the witnesses Narinder Kumar and Massa Singh are present. Since the accused is not present. None appeared on his behalf. As such, bail bonds of accused are cancelled and forfeited to the state. Now accused be summoned through arrest warrants for 27.05.2011. Notice to his surety be also issued for the date fixed. Both the above witnesses, who are present in the court today are discharged.
Sd/- Lalit Batra JSC/21.03.2011"

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he had to go to Rajasthan to look after his father who was unwell but he could not instruct his counsel to seek exemption from his personal appearance. It is submitted that now non-bailable warrants have been issued against the petitioner.

Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, the petitioner is directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on the date already fixed, i.e. 16.09.2011 and in case of his filing an application for regular bail, the same shall be decided by the learned Trial Court on the same day.

The petition stands disposed of.





September 08, 2011                                 (Rakesh Kumar Jain)
vinod*                                                    Judge