CRM-M-36174-2026 157 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-36174-2026 Date of Decision : 07.07.2026 Radhey Soni @ R. Soni …...Petitioner Versus State of Union Territory, Chandigarh and others …...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH Present: Mr. Akshit Grover, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Abhinav Gupta, Addl. P.P. for U.T. Chandigarh **** SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral) 1. Instant petition, under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (earlier Section 482 Cr.P.C.), has been filed for quashing of order dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P- 1) passed by learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh in Execution application under Section 72 of Consumer Protection Act, 2019 registered No. DC/44/EA No. 296 dated 16.09.2024, whereby present petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender under Section 84 of BNS alongwith all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the absence was not intentional, rather due to unavoidable circumstances. He further submits even in the execution proceedings, qua the order passed by the Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, petitioner had sought accommodation for paying REENA 2026.07.10 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36174-2026 remaining payment, and thereupon execution proceedings were adjourned for 24.03.2026. However, prior to that petitioner was arrested on 21.03.2026 in separate execution proceedings and he remained inside Model Jail uptill 12.05.2026, when petitioner was released on bail. 3. Thus, learned counsel submits that in case one opportunity is granted for releasing the petitioner on bail, by protecting him from arrest, the petitioner undertakes that he would not absent himself in future, without there being prior permission from the Court, and fully cooperate for early disposal of the trial. 4. Notice of motion. 5. Learned State counsel puts an appearance, and opposes the request of the petitioner by submitting that petitioner does not deserve any sympathy, because, he knowingly evade the proceedings before the trial Court. Learned State counsel further submits that looking at his behaviour, there is no surety that in future, petitioner would not be absent for the purpose of delaying the trial. 6. After examining the facts, this Court has formulated a uniform method to ensure the presence of accused before the concerned Court, to enable it to proceed further instead of delaying the proceedings by awaiting the presence of accused. Intentional or unintentional default of the accused can be dealt with by examining the facts from case to case involved, and where it is realised that absence or prolonged absence of such accused is intentional to evade the process of law, he/she can be penalized examining the nature of crime in which he is facing the proceedings and thereupon by imposing some cost amount subject to his/her capacity to pay. Primary object of every Court is only to examine the commission of REENA 2026.07.10 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36174-2026 crime in question before it viz-a-viz the person/accused, who is subjected to such proceedings, and if possible justice be imparted at the earliest without unnecessary delay. It is not expected that undue time would be devoted in securing the presence of absconded accused and also to waste energy by enforcing the special mechanism to arrest such accused. Considering all such aspects, this Court in the case of Ashish Kumar Honda @ Ashish Handa Vs. State of Punjab, 2022 (4) RCR (criminal) 765; Law Finder Doc Id # 20238111 considered similar plea of appearance, expressed at the instance of the accused, who failed to appear before the Court at appropriate time, and observed that: “paramount consideration of the Court is to secure presence of accused on each and every date for speeding up the trial for its final conclusion. Already Courts are flooded with so much litigation, resulting in slow pace of work, because of more than one reason. The required energy and manpower be used for expediting the proceedings of the Court, instead of running after the accused persons to get hold of them.” Again, this Court has considered the aforementioned similar plea in case Veena @ Veena Devi v. State of Punjab (CRM-M-2206-2025, decided on 16.01.2025. 7. I have considered the submissions of both the sides and examined the relevant material available on record. The petitioner has remiss in appearing before the Court only on one date, when impugned order has been passed against him. It also cannot be left unnoticed that as and when the petitioner came to know about passing of the impugned order, the petitioner has moved the present petition, REENA 2026.07.10 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh CRM-M-36174-2026 showing his inclination to submit himself before the trial Court. 8. In totality of circumstances, this court is of the view that the petitioner can be given one chance to appear before the trial Court, so that proceedings may restart and continue in smooth manner. Accordingly, plea of the petitioner is accepted. Impugned order dated 12.05.2026 (Annexure P-1) is set aside and he is directed to be released on bail, in the eventuality of surrender by him before the concerned Court on or before 21.07.2026. The petitioner shall also furnish fresh bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Besides, petitioner would also submit specific undertaking/affidavit that he will keep appearing during the proceedings of the trial in future and the proceedings would not be delayed because of his conduct. 9. With aforementioned terms, present petition stands disposed of. (SANJAY VASHISTH) July 07, 2026 JUDGE reena Whether Speaking/Reasoned: YES/NO Whether Reportable: YES/NO REENA 2026.07.10 09:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh