RAJ BANSAL vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS

CRM-M-9276-2024 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 126+257 CRM-M-9276-2024 (O & M) Date of decision: 12.05.2026 Raj Bansal ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY Present : Mr. Parminder Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amrik Narwal, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.2 to 4. AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL) 1. The present petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 20.01.2024, Annexure P-3, vide which evidence of the prosecution was closed. 2. Learned counsel submits that although charges were framed way back in the year 2016, against which the accused had filed a revision, that was dismissed in 2019, whereafter application under Section 319 Cr.P.C., was moved which also stood dismissed on 08.12.2022 and it was only thereafter, that the recording of the prosecution evidence commenced, however, the trial Court without appreciating the aforesaid peculiar facts, proceeded to close evidence, thereby causing serious ASHOK KUMAR 2026.05.14 16:47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document -2- CRM-M-9276-2024 prejudice to the prosecution, thus, he