Mustfa vs State Of Haryana

N.S.Shekhawat, J

The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 528 of B.N.S.S/482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the impugned order dated 27.05.2026 (Annexure P-6), passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari, whereby, the bail of the petitioner was cancelled and the bail bonds and surety bonds were ordered to be forfeited to the State and the petitioner was ordered to be summoned through non-bailable warrants of arrest in case FIR No. 189, dated 20.05.2025 under Section 121(1), 132 and 331(6) of B.N.S{corresponding Sections 332,353 and 453 of IPC}, Police Station Yamuna Nagar, Sadar.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the FIR in the present case was registered on 20.05.2025 and thereafter, he was ordered to be released on bail by this Court vide order dated 08.12.2025. Learned counsel further contends that the petitioner was regularly appearing before the Trial Court, during the course of trial. However, on one date i.e. 27.05.2026, he moved an application seeking exemption from personal appearance, but, the same was declined by the Trial Court. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner, the Trial Court had cancelled the bail and the bail bonds and surety bonds were ordered to be forfeited to the State and the petitioner was ordered to be summoned through non-bailable warrants of arrest. Learned counsel further submits that the non-appearance of the petitioner was unintentional and he is ready to surrender before the Court and shall join the trial proceedings. He further contends that the petitioner shall appear on each and every date of hearing, before the Trial Court and shall not absent himself during the Court proceedings.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Abhimanyu Antil, DAG, Haryana, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State.

Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had not appeared intentionally before the Trial Court and there is no illegality in the impugned order dated 27.05.2026 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari.

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

It is apparent that the FIR in the present case was registered in the year 2025 and the petitioner is facing the prosecution since then. From the record, it is apparent that on 27.05.2026, the petitioner could not appear before the Trial Court and the Trial Court had cancelled the bail and the bail bonds and surety bonds were ordered to be forfeited to the State.

Taking a lenient view of the matter, the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner is accepted and the petitioner is permitted to surrender before the Trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate within a period of two weeks from today and on his surrender, he shall be admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds and surety to the satisfaction of the concerned Court.

At the time of furnishing of bail bonds, the petitioner shall also file an affidavit before the concerned Court that he shall continue to appear before the Court on each and every date of hearing and shall not absent himself during the Court proceedings, except with prior permission of the Court.

The Trial Court/CJM/Duty Magistrate shall also be at liberty to impose any other conditions, as it deems fit in the peculiar facts and circumstances of case.

The petition stands allowed in the above terms.