AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 247 wordsSwatanter Kumar, J.
Notice.
Mr. M.S. Bhinder, DA Haryana accepts notice on behalf of State of Haryana.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The accusedpetitioner did not appear before the Trial Court on 23.8.1995 while he was on bail. Consequently, the trial Court cancelled the bail bonds and nonbailable warrant was issued against the petitioner. The first bail application of the petitioner was rejected by the Trial Court on 23.8.1995 and had again been rejected vide order dated 19.9.1995.
The petitioner submits that he could not appear before the Courts on 26.8.1995 because he had taken the date to be 24.8.1995 and not 23.8.1995. The petitioner had actually appeared before the Trial Court on 24.8.1995. Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal rejected the bail of the petitioner on the ground that on that date three connected cases could have been concluded if the accusedpetitioner had come present. However, in the interest of justice, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail upon his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 25,000/ with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. It is stated that the cases are fixed for 13.11.1995. The petitioner shall be present before the Trial Court and Court may conclude the prosecution evidence in the cases in question. it is made clear that in any circumstance the petitioner would not absent himself from the Court.
The petition is disposed of accordingly.