CRM-M-13112- 170 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Jakir @ Jakir Hussain State of Haryana CORAM : HON'BLE MS Present: Mr. Khalid Taura MANDEEP PANNU J. 1. This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 482 of Cr.P.C) 30.09.2023 (Annexure P warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the learned Chief Jud person in FIR No. of IPC (corresponding Section 310(4) & 310 (5) of BNS) Rewari, District Rewari therefrom. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been granted regular bail in the aforesaid FIR and had duly complied with the directions issued by the learned trial Court. After completion of investigation, the police presented the chall -2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH -.- CRM Date of Decision : Jakir @ Jakir Hussain VERSUS Haryana HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU Mr. Khalid Taura, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 (corresponding Section 482 of Cr.P.C) seeking (Annexure P-7) passed by the learned trial Court issued non warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner as proclaimed in FIR No. 32 dated 19.03.2016 registered under Sections (corresponding Section 310(4) & 310 (5) of BNS) Rewari, District Rewari along with all the consequential proceedings Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been granted regular bail in the aforesaid FIR and had duly complied with the directions issued by the learned trial Court. After completion of investigation, the police presented the challan before the learned trial Court almost three years after the -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-13112-2026 (O&M) Date of Decision : 11.03.2026 ....Petitioner ....Respondents MANDEEP PANNU , Advocate for the petitioner. This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of impugned order dated the learned trial Court issued non-bailable warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the icial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner as proclaimed registered under Sections 399 and 402 IPC (corresponding Section 310(4) & 310 (5) of BNS) at Police Station Sadar along with all the consequential proceedings arising Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been granted regular bail in the aforesaid FIR and had duly complied with the directions issued by the learned trial Court. After completion of investigation, the police an before the learned trial Court almost three years after the This petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 of impugned order dated bailable warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the icial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner as proclaimed 399 and 402 IPC Sadar arising Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had been granted regular bail in the aforesaid FIR and had duly complied with the directions issued by the learned trial Court. After completion of investigation, the police an before the learned trial Court almost three years after the TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13112- grant of regular bail to the petitioner. presentation of the challan, no notice or summons were ever served upon the petitioner requiring him to appear be petitioner remained completely unaware of the presentation of the challan and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. As a result, the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled and non vide order dated 30.09.2023. 3. Thereafter, proclamation proceedings were initiated against the petitioner on 10.11.2025 appear before the learned Trial Court on declared a proclaimed 4. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner was never duly or val served at any stage and, therefore, had no knowledge of the actual dates of hearing before the trial Court. It is further argued that the mandatory requirements of Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. were not complied with prior to passing the impugned order. The non-appearance of the petitioner was neither deliberate nor intentional. 5. Aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary declaration of the petitioner as a proclaimed person, the present petition has been filed before this Court. 6. It is also submitted that trial Court on each and every date. 7. Notice of motion. 8. Mr. accepts notice for the respondent been rightly passed on the ground of the absence of the petitioner. -2026 (O&M) grant of regular bail to the petitioner. He further submits that at the time of presentation of the challan, no notice or summons were ever served upon the petitioner requiring him to appear before the learned trial Court. Consequently, the petitioner remained completely unaware of the presentation of the challan and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. As a result, the bail granted to the petitioner was cancelled and non-bailable warrants were issued against him vide order dated 30.09.2023. Thereafter, proclamation proceedings were initiated against the 10.11.2025 for 13.02.2026, and the serving constable was directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 12.01.2026 declared a proclaimed person vide order dated 12.02.2026 Learned counsel contends that the petitioner was never duly or val served at any stage and, therefore, had no knowledge of the actual dates of hearing before the trial Court. It is further argued that the mandatory requirements of Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. were not complied with prior to passing the impugned order. appearance of the petitioner was neither deliberate nor intentional. Aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary declaration of the petitioner as a proclaimed person, the present petition has been filed before this Court. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes to appear before the trial Court on each and every date. Notice of motion. Mr. Sushil Bhardwaj, Addl. A.G Haryana accepts notice for the respondent-State and submits that the impugned passed on the ground of the absence of the petitioner. -2- He further submits that at the time of presentation of the challan, no notice or summons were ever served upon the fore the learned trial Court. Consequently, the petitioner remained completely unaware of the presentation of the challan and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. As a result, the bail granted to able warrants were issued against him Thereafter, proclamation proceedings were initiated against the , and the serving constable was directed to 12.01.2026. Ultimately the petitioner was 12.02.2026. Learned counsel contends that the petitioner was never duly or validly served at any stage and, therefore, had no knowledge of the actual dates of hearing before the trial Court. It is further argued that the mandatory requirements of Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. were not complied with prior to passing the impugned order. appearance of the petitioner was neither deliberate nor intentional. Aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary declaration of the petitioner as a proclaimed person, the present petition has been filed before this Court. the petitioner undertakes to appear before the , Addl. A.G Haryana, who is present in Court, State and submits that the impugned order has passed on the ground of the absence of the petitioner. He further submits that at the time of presentation of the challan, no notice or summons were ever served upon the fore the learned trial Court. Consequently, the petitioner remained completely unaware of the presentation of the challan and the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court. As a result, the bail granted to able warrants were issued against him Thereafter, proclamation proceedings were initiated against the , and the serving constable was directed to the petitioner was idly served at any stage and, therefore, had no knowledge of the actual dates of hearing before the trial Court. It is further argued that the mandatory requirements of Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. were not complied with prior to passing the impugned order. Aggrieved by the illegal and arbitrary declaration of the petitioner as a the petitioner undertakes to appear before the , who is present in Court, order has TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13112- 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of taken up for final disposal. 10. A perusal of against the petitioner have been received back unexecuted. trial Court initiated proclamation proceedings against the petitioner without following the proper procedure as prescribed under Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. Court has not recorded its satisfaction based on report that the accused abscond or is concealing himself so that the reasonable diligence 11. Further the reliance is placed upon the judgment of this Court in ‘Surjit Singh Dhaliwal vs. State of Punjab’, CRM 16.05.2022, wherein the secure the accused’s presence in trial its own, which establishes the bonafide at this stage. Without adjudicating the explanation offered its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, deems it approp following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions mentioned in this order 12. In view of dictum and also keeping in view the fact that the petitioner himself appeared before the Court and the undertaking given petitioner, the prayer of the petitioner is accepted. The impugned order dated 30.09.2023 (Annexure P -2026 (O&M) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of taken up for final disposal. A perusal of zimini orders reveals that against the petitioner have been received back unexecuted. trial Court initiated proclamation proceedings against the petitioner without following the proper procedure as prescribed under Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. Court has not recorded its satisfaction based on report that the accused abscond or is concealing himself so that the warrants diligence. Further the reliance is placed upon the judgment of this Court in ‘Surjit Singh Dhaliwal vs. State of Punjab’, CRM , wherein the court has observed that secure the accused’s presence in trial. The petitioner its own, which establishes the bonafide at this stage. Without adjudicating the explanation offered and stand taken by the petitioner, this Court, in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, deems it approp following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions mentioned in this order. In view of dictum laid down in Surjit Singh Dhaliwal’s case (supra) keeping in view the fact that the petitioner himself appeared before the undertaking given before this Court the prayer of the petitioner is accepted. The impugned order dated 30.09.2023 (Annexure P-7) where by the learned trial Court issued non -3- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case with their able assistance and with the consent of parties, the matter is orders reveals that non-bailable warrants issued against the petitioner have been received back unexecuted. However, the learned trial Court initiated proclamation proceedings against the petitioner without following the proper procedure as prescribed under Section 82(2) Cr.P.C. The Court has not recorded its satisfaction based on report that the accused abscond warrants of arrest can be execute despite Further the reliance is placed upon the judgment of this Court in ‘Surjit Singh Dhaliwal vs. State of Punjab’, CRM-M-20849 of 2021, decided on court has observed that the primary object of service is to The petitioner has approached this Court on its own, which establishes the bonafide at this stage. Without adjudicating the and stand taken by the petitioner, this Court, in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C, deems it appropriate to grant the following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions Surjit Singh Dhaliwal’s case (supra) keeping in view the fact that the petitioner himself appeared before the before this Court by the learned counsel for the the prayer of the petitioner is accepted. The impugned order dated where by the learned trial Court issued non-bailable I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the matter is bailable warrants issued owever, the learned trial Court initiated proclamation proceedings against the petitioner without The Court has not recorded its satisfaction based on report that the accused absconded of arrest can be execute despite Further the reliance is placed upon the judgment of this Court in 20849 of 2021, decided on the primary object of service is to has approached this Court on its own, which establishes the bonafide at this stage. Without adjudicating the and stand taken by the petitioner, this Court, in the exercise of riate to grant the following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions Surjit Singh Dhaliwal’s case (supra) keeping in view the fact that the petitioner himself appeared before the by the learned counsel for the the prayer of the petitioner is accepted. The impugned order dated bailable TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-13112- warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner person along with all the consequential proceedings 13. Accordingly, t Court within a period of payment of Rs. Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh 14. In case, such an application for bail is moved by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, the same shall be considered on the same date and decided in accordance with law. 15. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, this order shall be deemed to be vacated. 16. With aforementioned terms, present petition stands disposed of. 17. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. March 11, 2026 tripti Whether speaking/non Whether reportable -2026 (O&M) warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner along with all the consequential proceedings Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial Court within a period of 10 days from today and apply for regular bail payment of Rs.5,000/- as costs to be paid by the petitioner in the Poor Patients , PGIMER, Chandigarh. In case, such an application for bail is moved by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, the same shall be considered on the same date and decided accordance with law. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, this order shall be deemed to be vacated. With aforementioned terms, present petition stands disposed of. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. Whether speaking/non-speaking : Speaking Whether reportable : Yes/No -4- warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistate, Rewari, declared the petitioner as proclaimed along with all the consequential proceedings are ordered to be set aside. he petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial and apply for regular bail, subject to as costs to be paid by the petitioner in the Poor Patients In case, such an application for bail is moved by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, the same shall be considered on the same date and decided It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, this order shall be deemed to be vacated. With aforementioned terms, present petition stands disposed of. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (MANDEEP PANNU) JUDGE : Speaking : Yes/No warrants against the petitioner as well as order dated 12.02.2026, whereby the as proclaimed he petitioner is directed to surrender before the trial subject to as costs to be paid by the petitioner in the Poor Patients In case, such an application for bail is moved by the petitioner before the learned trial Court, the same shall be considered on the same date and decided It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of. TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.13 18:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document