Punjab and Haryana High Court
CRM-M/16279/2026 of SACHIN ALIAS PARSHOTAM KUMAR ALIAS PURUSHOTAM DASS Vs STATE OF PUNJAB on 13 July 2026
-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 148 CRM-M-16279-2026 Date of decision: 13.07.2026 SACHIN ALIAS PARSHOTAM KUMAR ALIAS PURUSHOTAM DASS ... PETITIONER Versus STATE OF PUNJAB … RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL Present:- Mr. P.S. Bal,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 13.07.2026
SACHIN ALIAS PARSHOTAM KUMAR ALIAS PURUSHOTAM DASS
... PETITIONER
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB
… RESPONDENT
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. GREWAL
Present:-
Mr. P.S. Bal, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
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 preferred by the petitioner under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 Cr.P.C.), seeking quashing of the order dated 02.02.2016 (Annexure P-12) passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rupnagar, in CHI/6934/2013, titled as ‘State vs. Nishant Sharma’ arising out of FIR No.20 dated 12.02.2011, under Sections 420, 406 IPC (now Sections 318 & 316 BNS, 2023) registered at Police Station Kurali, District Rupnagar (now SAS Nagar Mohali) whereby the petitioner has been declared as a proclaimed person.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the trial Court, without following the procedure prescribed under Section 82 Cr.P.C., declared the petitioner a proclaimed person vide the impugned order, which is unsustainable under the law. Learned counsel also submits that the petitioner SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.14 10.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh undertakes to appear before the trial Court concerned on each and every date and would not absent himself without prior permission of the trial Court. It is, therefore, prayed that the petitioner may be permitted to surrender before the learned trial Court to attend the trial proceedings continuously and the impugned order may be set aside.
3. Notice of motion.
4. On the asking of the Court, Mr. P.S. Pandher, AAG, Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the case file.
6. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, this Court does not find any legitimate ground to interfere with the impugned order. However, liberty is granted to the petitioner that in case, he surrenders before the trial Court within 07 days and moves an application for grant of bail, the same shall be considered and decided by the trial Court within a period of 03 days of filing of the said application in accordance with law.
7. With these observations, the present petition stands disposed of.
(H.S. GREWAL) JUDGE 13.07.2026 Sonia
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable
: Yes/No SONIA GUGNANI 2026.07.14 10.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh