Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/33942/2026 of JEEVAN SINGH @ JIWAN SINGH Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 1 July 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.33942 of 2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:-01.07.2026 Jeevan Singh @ Jiwan Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Chahit Bansal, Advocate
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.
128 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M No.33942 of 2026 (O&M) Date of Decision:-01.07.2026
Jeevan Singh @ Jiwan Singh …..Petitioner. Versus State of Punjab .....Respondent.
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL ***** Present:- Mr. Chahit Bansal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J. (ORAL)
Prayer in the present petition preferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is for quashing of impugned order dated 07.02.2026 (Annexure P-5) in case FIR No.05 dated 28.01.2023 registered under Section 387 IPC, Section 25(7)(1) of the Arms Act and Section 207 of the Motor Vehicles Act, at Police Station Cheema, District Sangrur, whereby bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled and non-bailable warrants had been issued against him by the trial Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of some miscommunication, the petitioner could not appear before the trial Court on 07.02.2026 as a result of which, his bail was cancelled. He submits that thereafter, the petitioner did not appear as he was under the impression that the date was fixed later and only when he came to know that non-bailable warrants had been issued, he has approached this Court by way of the instant petition. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner shall duly appear before the trial Court on the date fixed, i.e 17.08.2026 but YAG DUTT 2026.07.02 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.
CRM-M No.33942 of 2026 (O&M) -2-
apprehends that the moment he appears, he shall be arrested. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner shall continue to appear before the trial Court regularly and shall not absent himself from the trial.
3. Notice of motion.
4. Mr. Ravinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State. Learned State counsel opposes the prayer made by the petitioner stating that the petitioner did not appear before the trial Court on 07.02.2026 and has been on the run since then.
5. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties.
6. No doubt, the petitioner did not appear before the trial Court on 07.02.2026 as a result of which, his bail was cancelled. He has now preferred the present petition in July, 2026. However, keeping in view the unconditional statement given by learned counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner surrenders before the trial Court within a period of one week from today and files an application for bail, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. However, in case the petitioner absents from the trial without any sufficient cause, the trial Court shall be at liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
(VIKRAM AGGARWAL) July 01, 2026
JUDGE Yag Dutt
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No YAG DUTT 2026.07.02 12:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.