The Punjab and Haryana High Court has virtually admonished a trial court for moving in two different directions at once in a criminal case. After beginning proceedings to declare the accused a proclaimed person, it went on to issue non-bailable warrants while the bail was still in force.Taking a note of the overlap of steps and “careless” way of handling the case, Justice Manisha Batra of the High Court has asked the trial court to exercise caution in future. “The trial court is advised to be careful in future while passing zimni (interim) orders since no care has been taken of the fact that after initiation of proclamation proceedings, non-bailable warrants had been ordered to be issued,” the Bench observed.The High Court found the sequence of events “interesting and strange”, with Justice Batra flagging how the case unfolded. The observed that petitioner, an accused in a drugs case registered at a police station in Bathinda in March 2024, first defaulted on May 1, 2025. He failed to appear before the trial court, leading to cancellation of his bail.But he surrendered within days, and on May 7, 2025, the trial court restored his bail bonds and ordered his release. The position, the High Court noted, continued as his bail was never cancelled again. Months later, on October 10, 2025, he again failed to appear. This time, the trial court initiated proceedings to declare him a proclaimed person and adjourned the matter.But then, without following through on that course—and without cancelling the subsisting bail—the trial court passed subsequent orders issuing non-bailable warrants. “Interestingly and strangely though the trial Court initiated proceedings for declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed person as on October 10, 2025, and adjourned the case for November 26, 2025, but by totally ignoring the purport of the previous order, subsequent two orders were passed thereby issuing non bailable warrants as against the petitioner.” Justice Batra observed.Summing up the position, Justice Batra observed the bail bonds were restored on May 7, 2025, and were not cancelled again. Admonishing the approach, the court asserted: “The trial court is apparently adopting a careless approach in the matter by initiating proclamation proceedings and then abruptly changing the course and issuing non bailable warrants as against the petitioner without cancelling his bail”.Taking into consideration the circumstances, Justice Batra disposed of the matter by directing the petitioner to surrender before the trial court within 15 days. “On his doing so and on his furnishing fresh personal as well as surety bonds to the satisfaction of trial Court, he will be admitted to bail,” the Bench asserted.