High CourtsSingle Bench(2026) 09 P&H CK 0193

Aniket Kumar @ Anikit Kumar @ Rajat vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 3 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manisha Batra, J
RESULT
Disposed of
CASE NUMBER
CRM-M-49653-2026 (O&M)

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 473 words

CRM-36555-2026

1.

Application is allowed, as prayed for.

CRM-M-49653-2026

1.

The petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 03.06.2026 passed by the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala in case arising out of FIR No.37 dated 24.05.2024 registered under Sections 307, 379B, 323, 324, 341, 427, 506, 148 and 149 of IPC (Sections 325 & 326 of IPC added later on) at Police Station Sanaur, District Patiala, whereby his bail was cancelled and bonds were forfeited to the State on account of his non-appearance. Now non-bailable warrants have been issued for 11.09.2026.

2.

It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law as he had been regularly appearing before the Learned Trial Court, however, on 03.06.2026, he could not appear before the Trial Court as he was brutally attacked by Jogesh Sharma on 13.05.2026, has suffered serious injuries and was hospitalized. This fact had also been informed to the Clerk of his counsel engaged before the Trial Court but the said Clerk did not inform this fact to the counsel. His absence before the Learned Trial Court was not intentional but due to the reason narrated above. He is ready to join proceedings before the Learned Trial Court and to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed upon him. It is, therefore, argued that the petition deserves to be allowed.

3.

Notice of motion.

4.

Learned State counsel has advance notice of the petition and has submitted that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and, therefore, it is urged that the petition does not deserve to be allowed.

5.

This Court has heard the rival submissions made by the parties.

6.

On perusal of the impugned order passed by the Learned Trial Court, this Court is of the considered opinion that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order as the same has been passed on account of his non-appearance before the Trial Court. It is also revealed that no application for exemption from appearance has been filed on behalf of the petitioner. However, in view of the fact that the petitioner is ready to join the proceedings before the Learned Trial Court and is ready to abide by the terms and conditions to be imposed upon him by the Trial Court, the petition is disposed of by giving direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Trial Court on or before 11.09.2026 i.e. the date fixed before it and on doing so and furnishing fresh personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of Learned Trial Court, he shall be admitted to bail by the Trial Court. Till then the arrest of the petitioner shall remain stayed.

7.

A copy of this order be sent to the Learned Trial Court.