It is appalling and shocking to note that appellate court having insisted for appearance of the appellant on every date of hearing particularly in the backdrop of the suspension of sentence already passed. Prima facie the course open for the appellate court was to either appoint an amicus curiae and hear the appeal on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon or grant an opportunity to the concerned appellant-accused to make alternate arrangement if counsel was not assisting the Court. {Para 8}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRIMINAL) NO. 19050 OF 2025
MEENAKSHI Vs STATE OF HARYANA & ANOTHER
Dated: JANUARY 07th, 2026.
1. Heard.
2. Leave granted.
3. The Order dated 14.11.2025 passed in CRM-M-56737 of 2025 by the High
Court of Punjab and Haryana adjourning the proceedings is under challenge.
These proceedings relates to the dishonour of a cheque resulting in conviction
of the appellant – accused which is now pending in appeal CRA No.956/2017
wherein the prayer for suspension of sentence initially granted and released on
bail which order though extended from time to time came to be rejected.
Hence, aforestated revision petition has been filed and it has been adjourned
from time to time. Hence this appeal. While issuing notice to the respondents
on 27.11.2025, this Court had passed the following order: -
“2. The order of the appellate court cancelling the bail and taking into
custody petitioner-accused after issuance of a Non-Bailable Warrant
(NBW), which has been assailed before the High Court with a prayer of
interim relief having not been considered by the High Court, petitioner has
filed the present petition.
3. The genesis of this case relates to proceedings initiated by the second
respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (NI
Act) for the alleged return of the two cheques issued by the mother of the
petitioner herein for a sum of Rs.7,00,000/- (Rupees Seven Lakhs) and
Rs.5,00,240/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Two Hundred Forty), which cheques
came to be dishonored which culminated in conviction and sentence.
Being aggrieved by the same, an appeal has been preferred and the same is
pending.
4. Though, this Court does not appreciate the conduct of the petitioner,
inasmuch as her counsel having been changed on more than six occasions,
this change in counsel seems to have triggered the appellate court to issue
NBW against petitioner by cancelling the order of bail which had been
granted on 10.10.2017.
5. The records would also disclose that the mother of the petitioner herein,
namely, Ms. Mary Parashar, is said to have expired for which the death
certificate was also produced. Interestingly, the appellate court seemed to
have not accepted the death certificate and has directed the jurisdictional
Station House Officer (SHO) to ascertain the correctness of the said
statement and the certificate.
6. Be that as it may, the second appellant before the appellate court,
namely, the petitioner herein had filed an application for exemption due to
her health condition, namely, she was suffering from Herpes Zoster and
the exemption application filed on 22.08.2025 came to be allowed and the
matter stood adjourned to 04.09.2025 and by the time the first
appellant/petitioner herein could reach, the matter had been called, the
order of suspension and grant of bail was recalled and NBW issued. Later,
on 20.09.2025, petitioner surrendered and sought for grant of bail. Without
passing any order on said prayer, taking the petitioner into custody, the
matter was adjourned to 23.09.2025 by the appellate court and on the said
date, the application for bail came to be rejected.
7. Challenging the same, the petitioner had approached the jurisdictional
High Court under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023 (BNSS)/482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) in CRM-
2
M-56737 of 2025. The said matter is said to be pending before the High
Court and has stood adjourned from time to time due to paucity of time.
On account of pendency of the appeal before Session Judge,
petition/proceedings before High Court has also stood adjourned. Hence,
petitioner is before this Court.
8. It is appalling and shocking to note that appellate court having insisted for appearance of the appellant on every date of hearing particularly in the backdrop of the suspension of sentence already passed. Prima facie the course open for the appellate court was to either appoint an amicus curiae and hear the appeal on merits and pass appropriate orders thereon or grant an opportunity to the concerned appellant-accused to make alternate arrangement if counsel was not assisting the Court.
9. No doubt, the present appellate proceedings have been pending for more
than eight years, which is not justifiable on any ground whatsoever.
However, that by itself would not be a ground by which course adopted by the appellate court, could have been resorted to.”
4. We have been informed pursuant to our order aforestated the appellant has been released.
5. In view of notice having been issued to the State, Shri Lokesh Singhal, learned
Senior Counsel has appeared and with his usual fairness submitted that in the
state of Haryana, the practice of the accused being called upon to be present
before Appellate Court on all the dates of hearing is prevalent, even after an
order of suspension of sentence has been passed and bail has been granted in a
criminal appeal. He would hasten to add that such scenario is prevalent in the
light of Form No.45 (Bond and Bail-Bond for attendance before Officer in
Charge of Police Station or Court) found in Schedule II of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. He would contend that on account of the appellant -
3
accused executing such bond and agreeing and undertaking thereunder to
attend the Court after being granted bail is the sole reason on which appellants
or revision petitioners are being directed by the Appellate Court or the
Revisional Court to appear on all dates of hearing.
6. The Appellate Court or Revisional Court after being satisfied of the necessity
to suspend the sentence would have exercised its power and granted the prayer
for suspension of sentence and ordered for release of such appellant – accused
on bail. The appeal before the Appellate Court many a times would be pending
for months or years together and many a times after being posted before the
Court for hearing it would be adjourned for myriad reasons namely either at the
instance of the appellant - accused or the State or the complainant etc.
However, in such circumstances, to call upon the accused to be present on
every date of hearing before the Revisional Court or the Appellate Court would
be burdensome to such accused and same is not warranted at all and it would
serve no purpose. In the event of appeal or revision being dismissed the
consequences would automatically follow and the jurisdictional magistrate
would be fully empowered to secure the presence of such accused in
4
accordance with the provisions of the Act.
7. Hence, we are of the considered view that, directing the appellant – accused to
be present before the Appellate Court or the Revisional Court would not be
warranted particularly after an order for suspension of sentence has been
passed and bail has been granted. With these observations, the Appeal stands
disposed of accordingly. Let the copy of this order be placed before the
Hon’ble Chief Justice, Punjab and Haryana High Court for being circulated to
the District Judiciary through issuance of appropriate circular or as deemed fit
by the Chief Justice.
8. It is also made clear that bail granted to the appellant by this Court by Order
dated 27.11.2025 would be in operation till disposal of the appeal CRA
No.956/ 2017 and appellant shall cooperate with the Appellate Court in
disposal of the appeal expeditiously and preferably within three (3) months.
5
………………….................J.
[ARAVIND KUMAR]
………………….................J.
[PRASANNA B. VARALE]
NEW DELHI;
JANUARY 07th, 2026.
No comments:
Post a Comment