JUDGMENT : Ranjan Sharma, J. The petitioner [Dipender Thakur] has come up before this Court, under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, assailing the order dated 23.04.2024, [Annexure P-1] [referred to as the Impugned Order] passed by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, [H.P.] in Case No 251/3 of 2022, titled as Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited versus Dipender Thakur whereby, the Learned Trial Court has dismissed the application filed by the petitioner under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of the NBW’s and against denial of bail, and by sending the petitioner to judicial custody on 23.04.2024 till 06.05.2024. 2. On listing of the case today, Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondent. 3. With the consent of the parties and in peculiar facts of this case, the instant petition is taken up for hearing/disposal at this stage. 4. Precisely, the case set up by Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Respondent-Complainant [Shri Ram Transport Finance Company Limited] filed a complaint under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in Case No.251-3 of 2022, (Annexure P-1), before the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, (HP), on which, the cognizance was taken by the Court and the petitioner-accused [Dipender Thakur], was directed to appear and consequently, the petitioner-accused appeared and furnished the personal/surety bonds before the Learned Trial Court. Learned counsel further submits that the matter was again listed on 17.01.2024, on which date the petitioner could not appear before the Learned Trial Court, as he was suffering from fever. Due to non-appearance of the petitioner on 17.01.2024, the Learned Trial Court issued the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s], so as to ensure the presence of the bail petitioner for 08.05.2024. 5. Though the Learned Trial Court had issued the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s] on 17.01.2024 for 8.05.2024, but the petitioner-accused, appeared and surrendered before the Learned Trial Court on 23.04.2024. On surrender, the petitioner moved an application under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying for cancelling the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s], and for granting bail, being bailable offence, but on 23.04.2024 [Annexure P-3] the Learned Trial Court dismissed the application on the ground, that the applicant/petitioner could not furnish any material proof to substantiate the reasons in support of his ailment. While passing the impugned order the petitioner-accused was sent to judicial custody till 08.05.2024, subject to the condition that he shall be produced through Video Conferencing before the Learned Trial Court on 06.05.2024, if he was not bailed out earlier. 6. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Learned Counsel for the respondent. 7. A perusal of the case records reveal that the order dated 23.04.2024, (Annexure P-3), passed by the Learned Chief judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, (HP) rejecting-disposing of the application under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for cancelling the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s] and for releasing him on bail has been assailed in these proceedings. 8. In the background of the material on record, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, [Annexure P-3], passed by the Learned Trial Court suffers on two grounds; firstly, once the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s] were issued on 17.01.2024, directing the production of the petitioner-accused [Dipender Thakur] for 08.052024 but, the petitioner appeared on surrender before the Learned Trial Court on 23.04.2024, then in these circumstances, the only option available was to cancel the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s] issued by it but the refusal to cancel the Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s], despite appearance, on surrender defeats the object and rationale of issuing Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s], in Section 70(2) Cr.P.C. whereby, the primary object of the Court for issuing NBW’s is to ensure the presence of the accused. Accordingly, in facts of this case, once the petitioner-accused, against whom NBW’s were issued on 17.01.2024 for 08.05.2024, had in fact surrendered and appeared before the Learned Trial Court on 23.04.2024 then, the Learned Trial Court erred in not exercising its powers, by not cancelling the NBW’s, leading to patent illegality and therefore, the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, [Annexure P-3], is not sustainable in law; and secondly, once the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is bailable offence, coupled with the fact that the petitioner-accused, appeared, on surrender, before the Learned Trial Court on 23.04.2024, then, the learned Trial Court could not refuse the bail, merely on account of the fact that the petitioner had not disclosed the ground, on which he could not appear, in response to the issuance of Non Bailable Warrants [NBW’s], in terms of Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is an alien consideration altogether, when, the object of bail as per mandate of law, is to ensure the presence of the accused before the Investigation or during Trial, as the case may be. Once it is nowhere borne out from the records that the petitioner-accused [Dipender Thakur] herein, after his surrender on 23.04.2024, had failed to or had intended not to participate in the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act then, the Impugned Order dated 23.04.2024, [Annexure P-3], passed by the Learned Trial Court in rejecting or denying the claim for bail is dehors the object, spirit and mandate of granting bail, which has been ignored by the Learned Trial Court, in the instant case. 9. Besides the above, in peculiar facts of this case, while filing the application under Section 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the specific stand was taken that the non appearance, was on account of the ailment of the petitioner-accused and once this fact has not been denied or controverted by the non-applicant/complainant, therefore, on this ground also, the Impugned Order dated 23.04.2024, (Annexure P-3), by recording the findings that the Learned Trial Court was not satisfied with the grounds so taken, is vitiated by non-application of mind; when, the plea was not denied/or is admitted by the non-applicant-complainant also. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, [Annexure P-3], passed by the Learned Trial Court i.e. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, in Case No.251/3 of 2022, is quashed and set aside. Since the petitioner-accused is in judicial custody, therefore, the Respondents/State Authorities are directed to release the petitioner-accused [Dipender Thakur] from custody, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Learned Trial Court. In aforesaid terms, the instant petition as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of, accordingly.