Sign in

HC junks AAP MLA Pathanmajra’s plea challenging PO proceedings

The plea was taken up by the bench of justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, which ordered dismissal of the same after a brief hearing.

Published on: Jan 29, 2026, 04:56:01 IST
By , Chandigarh
Share
Share via
  • facebook
  • twitter
  • linkedin
  • whatsapp
Copy link
  • copy link

The Punjab and Haryana high court on Wednesday dismissed plea from Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Sanaur MLA Harmeet Singh Pathanmajra, seeking quashing of arrest warrants and proclamation proceedings initiated in a rape and cheating case registered in Patiala registered on the complaint of a Zirakpur woman.

Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Sanaur MLA Harmeet Singh Pathanmajra
Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) Sanaur MLA Harmeet Singh Pathanmajra

The plea was taken up by the bench of justice Tribhuvan Dahiya, which ordered dismissal of the same after a brief hearing. During the hearing, the court questioned him on evading the law and was of the opinion that he should have joined the investigation. Detailed order is awaited.

The 50-year-old MLA has been on the run since September 2, when he fled from the house of his relative in Karnal moments after a Punjab Police team arrived to arrest him.

Patiala police had registered a case against Pathanmajra at the civil lines police station on September 1, 2025, on charges of rape, cheating, and criminal intimidation. The case was registered based on a complaint by a Zirakpur-based woman.

In his petition, the MLA had challenged the arrest warrants of September 5 and September 11, 2025, by a Patiala court and subsequent proclamation proceedings and the December 20, 2025, order declaring him a proclaimed person by a Patiala court.

As per the plea, the MLA is currently residing in Australia, and this fact was in the knowledge of the police. The petitioner was declared proclaimed person when he was in Australia and, therefore, no service of any notice was done by the police even though it was in their knowledge that he was not residing in the country, the plea had argued.

He had termed the case “abuse of process of law” and further claimed that the FIR was registered due to “political and ulterior motive” after a complaint from the woman on September 1, 2025.