✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 07 May 2026

YOGESH @JYOTI & ANR v. STATE OF PUNJAB

Case Details Punjab & Haryana High Court · 07 May 2026
Court
Punjab & Haryana High Court
Case No.
CRM-M- No. 17668 of 2026
Decided
07 May 2026
Length
1,102 words

Summary

A structured summary for this judgment hasn’t been prepared yet. The full text is below.

Precedent status

No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.

Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.

Why is this linked?

Original judgment text

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA P CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA PARTAP SINGH Argued by : Mr. Paras Jagga, Advocate for Argued by , Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG Punjab. Mr. Eklavya Darshi, DAG Punjab. SURYA PARTAP SINGH, J (ORAL) SURYA P Bharatiya This is a petition filed under Section 528 of ‘the Bharatiya This is a petition filed under Section 528 of Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023’, seeking Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 for quashing of order dated ’, seeking for quashing of order dated

09.03.2026 (Annexure P-2) passed by the 09.03.2026 Judge, Special ) passed by the Court of learned Judge, Special Court, Jalandhar, hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’ Court, Jalandhar, only. By virtue of hereinafter referred to as ‘trial Court’ only. By virtue of abovementioned order, the bails of petitioner abovementioned order, the bail As a of petitioners have been cancelled. As a result thereof, the bail bonds of the petitioner result thereof, the forfeited and to of the petitioners have been forfeited and to procure their their presence in the Court, their warrant issued. warrants of arrest have been issued.

2. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that It has been contended by learned counsel for the pet regularly appearing before the learned trial Court. the petitioners were regularly appearing before the learned trial Court regularly appearing before the learned trial Court the petitioner According to learned counsel for the petitioners, on 09.03.2026 they could According to learned counsel for the petitioners According to learned counsel for the petitioners not appear before the learned trial Court not appear their admission in de- before the learned trial Court due to their admission in de addiction center at Civil Hospital Jalandhar addiction center at their counsel had filed Civil Hospital Jalandhar, and that their counsel had filed GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.07 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -17668-2026(O&M) 2 the application for exemption on the same day, the application for was declined exemption on the same day, but, the same was declined As per learned counsel for the petitioners, in the by the learned trial Court. As per learned counsel for the petitioners, in the As per learned counsel for the petitioners, in the by the learned trial Court. rder was passed, which abovementioned circumstances, the impugned order was passed, which abovementioned circumstances, the impugned o abovementioned circumstances, the impugned o deserves to be quashed. deserves to be quashed.

3. In view of above, once, admittedly ove, once, admittedly the petitioners were present before the learned trial Court in compliance with the conditions before the learned trial Court in compliance with the conditions in compliance with the conditions imposed in the bail order(s), it is hereby held that the learned trial imposed in the bail order Court was , it is hereby held that the learned trial Court was he bail bonds and left with no option but to cancel the bail order(s), forfeit the bail bonds and left with no option but to cancel the bail order left with no option but to cancel the bail order issue warrant of arrest against the petitioner issue warrant . Since apparently, there is no of arrest against the petitioners. Since apparently, there is no illegality in the abovementioned order, there is no scope for interference in illegality in the abovementioned order, there is no scope for interference in illegality in the abovementioned order, there is no scope for interference in illegality in the abovementioned order, there is no scope for interference in the impugned order. the impug

4. has sought At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioners has sought At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner to surrender before the learned trial Court and liberty for the petitioners to surrender before the learned trial Court and to surrender before the learned trial Court and liberty for the petitioner move application(s) for bail. The learned counsel for the petitioner move application for bail. The learned counsel for the petitioners e learned trial Court to dispose of the bail prayed for a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the bail e learned trial Court to dispose of the bail prayed for a direction to th application(s), to be moved by the petitioner application , to be moved by the petitioners, in a time-bound manner.

5. In view of above, the present petition is hereby disposed of with In view of above, the present petition is hereby to surrender before the learned trial Court a direction to the petitioners to surrender before the learned trial Court to surrender before the learned trial Court a direction to the petitioner surrender before the within a period of one month from today. If they surrender before the within a period of one month from today within a period of one month from today learned trial Court and move application(s) learned trial Court and move application for bail, the learned trial Court is (s) for bail, the learned trial Court is . It is, however, directed to dispose of the bail application(s) on the same day. It is, however, directed to dispose of the bail application directed to dispose of the bail application clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be clarified that the learned trial Court in the exercise of its discretion shall be at liberty to impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section at liberty to impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section at liberty to impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section at liberty to impose penalty under Section 491 of BNSS (erstwhile Section 446 of CrPC), as per law. 446 of CrPC) GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.07 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M- -17668-2026(O&M) 3

6. l also stand Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shal disposed of, accordingly. disposed of, accordingly. Gaurav Thakur GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.07 18:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. CRM-M- No. 17668 of 2026). ← Search more judgments