Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/41240/2026 of JASVIR SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 28 July 2026
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.41240 of 2026 Date of decision: 28.07.2026 Jasvir Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present :- Mr. S.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. ***** H.S.GREWAL, J.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.41240 of 2026
Date of decision: 28.07.2026
Jasvir Singh
…Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab
…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL
Present :-
Mr. S.S. Sandhu, Advocate
for the petitioner.
*****
H.S.GREWAL, J. (Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the order dated 19.08.2025 (Annexure P-3) passed by the learned Judge Special Court, Sangrur, in FIR No.12 dated 06.02.2020 registered under Sections 22/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Police Station Dharamgarh District Sangrur, whereby the bail and surety bonds of the petitioner were ordered to be forfeited and non-bailable warrants had been issued against him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court has erred in cancelling the bail and forfeiting the bail bonds of the petitioner as no prior notice or an opportunity of hearing was granted to him. He further submits that the impugned order (Annexure P-3) has been SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.28 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment
CRM-M No.41240 of 2026
passed in a mechanical manner and is, therefore, unsustainable under the law. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner undertakes to appear before the trial Court concerned on each and every date and would not absent himself without prior permission of the trial Court. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to surrender before the learned trial Court to attend the trial proceedings continuously and the impugned order may be set-aside.
3. Notice of motion.
4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. P.S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court does not find any legitimate ground to interfere with the impugned order. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner that in case, he surrenders before the trial Court within 07 days and moves an application for grant of bail, the same shall be considered and decided by the trial Court within a period of 03 days of filing of the said application in accordance with law.
7. With these observations, the present petition stands disposed of.
(H.S.GREWAL) 28.07.2026
JUDGE seema Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
SEEMA SHARMA 2026.07.28 17:22 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment