Allowed

Deepak @ Deepak Bainsla and Others v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC10 Sept 2026CRM-M/35458/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a petition seeking quashment of the impugned order declaring petitioners as proclaimed offenders. The petition was granted in terms of the parties' mutual statements that no arrest is required and a closure report is ready.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of in terms of the statements given by learned counsel for the parties; no arrest to be made.

Deepak @ Deepak Bainsla and Others Vs State of… — Quashing and FIR | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶2

139 CRM-M-35458-2026 Date of Decision: 10.09.2026

¶3

Deepak @ Deepak Bainsla and others …Petitioners V/s

¶4

The State of Haryana …Respondent

¶5

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM AGGARWAL

¶6

Present: Mr. R.K. Choudhary, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. Amit Sahni, Addl. Advocate General, Haryana ***

¶7

VIKRAM AGGARWAL, J (ORAL)

¶8

The prayer in this petition preferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, ‘the BNSS’) prays for the following substantive relief:-

¶9

“Petition Under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) for quashing and setting aside the impugned Order dated 18.11.2017 (Annexure P-4) passed by the learned Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palwal, whereby the Petitioners were declared as Proclaimed Offenders (P.O.) under Section 83 Cr.P.C. in FIR No. 353 dated 22.04.2017 (Annexure P-1), registered at Police Station Camp Palwal, District Palwal, under Sections 148, 149, 323, 325, 379-B and 506 IPC (corresponding to the erstwhile Section 191(3), 190, 115, 118(2), 304, 351 BNS), the said order being illegal, without jurisdiction, in violation of mandatory statutory procedure, and a gross abuse of the process of law, so that the Petitioners may be enabled to appear before and face the regular trial before the concerned learned Trial Court, in the interest of justice.” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the police is still

¶10

making attempts to arrest the petitioner.

¶11

Learned counsel representing the State, on the other hand,

¶12

VIKAS CHANDER 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶13

CRM-M-35458-2026 -2-

¶14

submits that pursuant to the petitioners having been declared proclaimed offenders, no FIR under Section 174A IPC was registered. He further submits that a closure report is ready and is being filed in the matter. He also submits, on instructions from SI Mahesh Kumar, Police Station Camp Palwal, that the police does not require the custody of the petitioners and, therefore, in the present matter, no arrest of the petitioners shall be made.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of the statement given by learned State counsel, no grievance subsists and the present petition be disposed of in the said terms.

¶16

The petition is accordingly disposed of in terms of the statements given by learned counsel for the parties.

¶17

Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

¶18

	(VI	KRAM AGGARWAL) JUDGE
September	10, 2026
vcgarg
	Whether speaking/reasoned	: Yes/No
	Whether reportable	: Yes/No

¶19

VIKAS CHANDER 2026.09.11 14:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Deepak @ Deepak Bainsla and Others v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak @ Deepak Bainsla and Others v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases