Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRWP/9812/2026 of YOUNUS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS on 13 August 2026
THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 175 CRWP-9812-2026 Date of decision : 13.08.2026 Younus ... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .. Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL Present:- Mr. Chirag Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision : 13.08.2026
Younus
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.. Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.GREWAL
Present:-
Mr. Chirag Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Rakesh Kumar Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Vishal Kashyap, Sr. DAG, Haryana.
***
H.S. Grewal, J.(Oral)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus for release of the detenues mentioned in para No.4 of the petition who are illegally dtained by respondents No. 4 to 7 and warrant officer may kidnly be appointed to lo- cate the detenue at premises of Batha Marka Pawan bricks Fields situated at village Khanda Kheri Road, Tehsil Kharkhoda, District Sonepat, Haryana.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the detenues have been working at the brick kiln of respondent No.4 but they have been illegally detained by respondents No.4 to 7 without any wages and are not allowed to leave the same.
3. Notice of motion to respondents No.1 to 3 only at this stage.
4. At the asking of the Court, Mr. P.S.Pandher, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3. RENU RAWAT 2026.08.14 16.21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the material placed on record.
6. A Division Bench of this Court, while dealing with a similar case in LPA No. 32 of 2013, decided on 11.01.2013, titled as Murti versus State of Punjab and others has observed that there can indeed be no doubt that if a labourer has been detained as bonded labour, it amounts to an offence under Sections 16 & 17 of the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976. It was further observed that the District Magistrate concerned is under statutory obligation to hold a fact finding enquiry as and when a complaint alleging violation of the provisions of the aforesaid Act is received.
7. Consequently, this criminal writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the District Magistrate, Sonepat, Haryana (respondent No.2) to treat this petition as a complaint under the Bonded Labour (Abolition) Act, 1976 and take immediate action in accordance with law for the release of the alleged detenues, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the writ petition. (H.S.GREWAL) 13.08.2026 JUDGE renu Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No RENU RAWAT 2026.08.14 16.21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh