Cr.M.P.(M) No. 944 of 2008 18.9.2008 Present: Ms. Yogita Dutta, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. for the respondent. This is an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for releasing the petitioner on bail in case No. 1-S/7 of 2006, titled State of H.P. Vs. Vikram Thakur, under Sections 147, 149, 341 and 395 of the Indian Penal Code, which is pending trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla. Heard. The petitioner is facing trial in the aforesaid case before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla. He did not put up his appearance before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla on 30.7.2008 and consequently, the bail bonds of the petitioner were cancelled and non-bailable warrant for his presence were issued. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla vide order dated 11.9.2008 has declined the prayer of the petitioner for his release on bail. The learned Additional Advocate General has resisted the bail application. Ms. Yogita Dutta, Advocate submits that her client is a Driver and on 26.7.2008 after the trial, he forgot to note down the next date of hearing under the impression that the case was to be fixed for recording the statements of prosecution witnesses after a month and he left for Delhi along with truck. In the meantime, on 2.8.2008, one of the petitioner’s friends met with an accident at Karnal, therefore, her client had to look after him. It was only in the first week of September, 2008 that the petitioner made a call to his home and he was informed that non- bailable warrants have been issued in the case against him and the petitioner immediately surrendered before the trial Court on 11.9.2008. Mrs. Yogita Dutta further submits that her client is an innocent person and the mistake on the part of the petitioner was not intentional or wilful. The petitioner undertakes to be more careful in future and will make himself available on each date of hearing for the trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla and also he is ready to furnish fresh bail bonds as ordered by the Hon’ble Court. The explanation given by the petitioner appears to be plausible for his non-appearance on 30.7.2008. Since he has undertaken to make himself available on each date of hearing before the learned trial Court and he is also ready to furnish fresh bail bonds, it is a fit case where the petitioner can be enlarged on bail. In view of the above, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in case No. 1-S/7 of 2006, titled State of H.P. Vs. Vikram Thakur pending against him before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla on his furnishing fresh personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge/Additional Sessions Judge, Shimla. The petitioner shall henceforth appear personally on each date of hearing before the trial Court. Copy 'Dasti' on usual terms. (Rajiv Sharma), J. September 18, 2008. (cr)