IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-10053-2026 (O&M)

Date of decision:23.02.2026 Shyam Bhardwaj ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY *****

Present : Mr. Munish Behl, Advocate, for the petitioner.

*****

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

1. Prayer made in the present petition for quashing the impugned order dated 27.10.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Faridabad in case FIR No.0254 dated 19.05.2017 registered under Section 174- A IPC at Police Station Sector 31 Faridabad, vide which the petitioner was declared as proclaimed person.

2. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner has been declared proclaimed person in FIR registered against him under Section 174-A IPC, wherein he was initially granted bail on 15.06.2017 and a compromise had been arrived at between him and the complainant, whereafter challan on 20.09.2017 and he continued to appear regularly before the trial Court and he had noted down the date to be 31.10.2025, leading to cancellation of bail and forfeiture of bail bonds vide order dated 14.08.2025, consequently, he was declared proclaimed person vide order dated 27.10.2025. He is ready and willing to join the proceedings and prays that one last opportunity may be granted to him to surrender before the trial Court.

3. Notice of motion.

4. At the asking of the Court, (cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:1)(cid:10)(cid:7)(cid:6)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:1)(cid:13)(cid:14)(cid:15)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:1)(cid:17)(cid:13)(cid:18)(cid:16) (cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:6)(cid:21)(cid:5)(cid:22)(cid:1)(cid:5)(cid:23)(cid:23)(cid:24)(cid:8)(cid:14)ti(cid:1)(cid:6)(cid:26)(cid:14)(cid:7)(cid:23)(cid:24)(cid:1)(cid:26)(cid:6)(cid:1)(cid:22)(cid:24)(cid:12)(cid:5)(cid:9)(cid:27)(cid:1)(cid:26)(cid:27)(cid:1)(cid:3)(cid:24)ti(cid:8)(cid:26)(cid:6)(cid:28)(cid:24)(cid:6)(cid:14)(cid:29)(cid:10)(cid:14)(cid:5)(cid:14)(cid:24) and submits that the order passed against the petitioner is legal and valid on account of the fact that he had absented from the proceedings before the trial Court without any just cause.

5. Heard.

6. In Gurbir Singh Mundi (supra), it was held that provisions of Section 82(2) Cr.PC. are to be mandatorily complied with cumulatively and not alternatively. The Court had quashed the order declaring the petitioner therein as proclaimed person on the ground that declaration was not read publicly in some conspicuous place of town or village, in which the accused ordinarily resides.

7. In Sonu Vs. State of Haryana 2021 (1) RCR (Crl.) 319, it was held that any non-compliance in the procedure prescribed in declaring a proclaimed person, cannot be treated as an irregularity but the same renders such proceedings a nullity.

8. The very purpose of initiation of proclamation proceedings, is to compel and secure the presence of the accused to face trial and establish the rule of law, as also to ensure finalization of the proceedings.

9. Considering the fact that the absence of the petitioner was not wilful or deliberate and his readiness and willingness to surrender and join the proceedings, in case one opportunity is granted to the petitioner, no prejudice shall be caused to any of the parties, rather his joining the proceedings would help in expediting the trial. This Court in light of the judgment referred to above being applicable to the instant case, finds that the ends of justice would be adequately met if the present petition is allowed.

10. In view of the afore-mentioned judgments and the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order dated 27.10.2025, is set aside.

11. He is directed to surrender before the trial Court on or before 11.03.2026 and on so doing, he shall release him on bail subject to its satisfaction, subject to costs of Rs.15,000/- to be deposited with Mata Mansa Devi Shrine Board. On furnishing bail/surety bonds, he is also directed to furnish undertaking by way of an affidav