IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Decided on : 06.04.2026 Sakildeen . . . Petitioner Versus U.T. Chandigarh . . . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH PRESENT: Mr. Abhishek Pundir, Advocate for Mr. Mohan Singh Rana, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, A.P.P., U.T. Chandigarh ****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

1. By way of present petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS petitioner is seeking quashing of order dated 09.10.2024(Annexure P-3), passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chandigarh, whereby the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed Person in case FIR No. 56 dated 16.07.2017, under Sections 279, 337, 304-A of IPC (Sections 281, 125A, 106(1) of BNS)

registered at Police Station Sector 49 Chandigarh.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, though petitioner was named in the FIR, allegations against him are general and vague. Petitioner was subsequently called by the investigating agency and released on police bail during the investigation. Thereafter, when the investigating agency filed the challan in the court, petitioner joined the proceedings before the Learned Trial Court, Chandigarh, and has regularly appeared before it.

Counsel further submits that petitioner, being a truck driver, inadvertently failed to appear on 09.10.2024 due to a misunderstanding regarding the correct date of hearing. The date noted by the petitioner and his previous counsel was 22.11.2023 instead of 20.11.2023, following which he was outside the district on duty. Petitioner had informed his counsel about his absence and requested that an application for exemption be filed, but was not apprised of the next date of hearing. Upon returning home and engaging new counsel, petitioner came to know for the first time that he had been declared a proclaimed person by the Learned Judicial Magistrate of Chandigarh on 09.10.2024, vide the impugned order (Annexure P-3).

It is further submitted that summons were not properly served upon the petitioner, as evident from copies dated 19.01.2024, 08.04.2024, 05.07.2024, and 30.06.2024 (Annexure P-4). Petitioner never had any intention to evade the legal process or disrespect the orders of the Court and was unaware of the pendency of the present case at the relevant time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that after petitioner was declared a proclaimed person, no further action has been taken, including the registration of any FIR under Section 209 of the BNS (corresponding to Section 174-A IPC).

Petitioner being declared a Proclaimed Person, apprehends his arrest. He is, however, ready and willing to surrender before the learned Trial Court and join the proceedings in the aforesaid case to facilitate its early conclusion. Petitioner undertakes to fully cooperate with the trial proceedings.

Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner’s absence before the learned Trial Court was neither intentional nor deliberate, but solely due to the reasons explained hereinabove.

4. He further contends that, if one more opportunity is afforded to the petitioner to appear by granting some protection from arrest, he undertakes that in all the future proceedings of the present case, he would never be absent from the Court, except by obtaining prior permission from the Court, and thus will fully cooperate in the Court proceedings for early completion of trial.

5. Notice of motion.

6. On asking of the Court, Ms. Simsi Dhir Malhotra, A.P.P., U.T. Chandigarh, who is present in Court, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-

U.T, A copy of the complete paper book has been supplied to him by learned counsel for the petitioner.

7. Learned State counsel opposes the request of the petitioner, and submits that petitioner has willfully remained absent from the proceedings of learned Trial Court and thus, does not deserve any sympathy. Therefore, petitioner should be directed to surrender before the Court and to face trial.

8. I have heard learned coun