Clarification on the Court’s Approach Under Section 528, BNSS – Existing Principles Reaffirmed
Binding Authority for Subordinate Courts on Procedural Handling of Non-Appearance Cases
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | CRM-M/23844/2025 of JASWINDER SINGH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR |
| CNR | PHHC010688922025 |
| Date of Registration | 01-05-2025 |
| Decision Date | 02-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED OF |
| Judgment Author | MS. JUSTICE RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL |
| Court | High Court of Punjab and Haryana |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of the Punjab and Haryana High Court |
| Type of Law | Criminal Procedure; Procedural Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether appearance and furnishing of bail bonds after issuance of non-bailable warrants justify quashing such warrants under Section 528 BNSS. |
| Ratio Decidendi | Where non-bailable warrants have been issued for accused’s non-appearance, and the accused subsequently joins proceedings and furnishes requisite bail bonds, no further orders are required regarding the warrants. The purpose of process is served once the accused submits to the jurisdiction and process of law. Procedural fairness is maintained so long as the accused participates and satisfies bail conditions. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | Non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner by the trial court due to non-appearance. The petitioner claimed absence was unintentional due to a communication gap with counsel. Pursuant to interim protection granted by the High Court, the petitioner joined proceedings before the trial court and furnished bail bonds. The Additional Sessions Judge recorded compliance. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts within the jurisdiction of Punjab and Haryana High Court |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Clarifies that when an accused joins proceedings and furnishes bail bonds after a non-bailable warrant has been issued for non-appearance, the need for further judicial orders in respect of the warrant is obviated.
- Reinforces that the court’s objective is met once the accused complies with appearance requirements and bail conditions.
- This approach aids in efficient disposal of procedural applications where non-appearance was not deliberate or contumacious.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court noted that the initial non-appearance resulted in non-bailable warrants being issued.
- The petitioner explained the absence as unintentional, arising from a communication gap.
- Pursuant to the interim protection provided by the High Court, the petitioner joined the proceedings and furnished requisite bail bonds before the trial court.
- On verifying compliance, the High Court held that the purpose of the non-bailable warrant had been served, and no further orders were required.
- As a result, the petition was disposed of, closing the matter.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Non-appearance on the relevant date was not intentional, but due to a communication gap with counsel.
- Sought quashing of the order issuing non-bailable warrants and protection from coercive steps.
Respondent (State of Haryana):
- No specific arguments summarized in the judgment.
Factual Background
Non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner for his non-appearance in appellate proceedings before the Additional Sessions Judge, Gurugram. The petitioner claimed his absence was unintentional, resulting from a communication lapse with his counsel. After interim protection was granted by the High Court, the petitioner joined the proceedings and furnished the required bail bonds, as confirmed by the trial court.
Statutory Analysis
The court considered Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), regulating procedure for appearance before trial courts, particularly in cases of defaulted appearance and issuance of non-bailable warrants. The judgment did not undertake a detailed interpretative exercise but operated within the established procedural framework, reaffirming application of Section 528 BNSS.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural innovations or guidelines were issued in the judgment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing procedural law and approach reaffirmed.
Citations
No specific legal citations (SCC / AIR / MANU / neutral citations) are mentioned in the judgment.