Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balwinder Singh Sidhu vs State Of Punjab on 12 April, 2023
CRM-M-27568-2021 neutral citation No. 2023:PHHC:052761
268
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-27568-2021
Date of Decision: April 12, 2023
Balwinder Singh Sidhu .....Petitioner
Vs.
State of Punjab .....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
-.-
Present:- Mr. Akshay Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V.K. Gupta, AAG, Punjab.
-.-
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
prayer has been made for quashing of order dated 12.03.20202 (P-3)
passed by the Court of learned JMIC, Jagraon, District Ludhiana, whereby
the petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender.
Having been arrayed as an accused in FIR No. 46 dated
03.08.2013, under Sections 406/ 420 IPC, registered at Police Station,
Raikot, District Ludhiana, besides his brother, the petitioner was declared
as proclaimed offender vide order dated 12.03.2020, which has been
assailed by way of present petition.
Referring to the orders Annexures P-3, P-6 &P-7, learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that the proclamation under Section 82
Cr.P.C. was made on 10.01.2020 for 14.01.2020 being the date for
appearance and thus, the same being short of statutory period of 30 days
was in violation of Section 82 (1) Cr.P.C. For the said purpose, Mr. Akshay
Jain, relies upon the judgment of this Court in Ashok Kumar Vs. State of
Haryana and another, 2013 (4) RCR (Criminal) 550. In addition, he also
submits that the trial Court did not even pass any order declaring the
petitioner as proclaimed offender on 14.01.2020 except adjourning the
SANJAY GUPTA
2023.04.17 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
CRM-M-27568-2021 neutral citation No. 2023:PHHC:052761
matter for 12.03.2020; whereas the petitioner was declared as proclaimed
offender on 12.03.2020 though there being no proclamation having been
effected for his appearance on the said date i.e. 12.03.2020. For reference,
para 4 of Ashok Kumar's case (supra) being relevant is reproduced
hereunder:-
"4. In view of the above provisions of Section 82(1)
Cr.P.C., it is clear that the publication was effected
on 9.2.2013 and the accused was directed to
appear in the Court as per that publication on
6.3.2013 which period was less than 30 days.
Therefore, it cannot be held that by passing the
impugned order on 13.3.2013, the publication has
been effected as per the provisions of Section 82
Cr.P.C. There was no order in the publication for
the accused giving specified time and place to
appear on 13.3.2013. Therefore, this order is not
as per law and the same is set aside."
On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that the
brother of the petitioner was continuously appearing before the Court below
and thus, the petitioner was having complete knowledge about the
pendency of the present proceedings. He further submits that the petitioner
relies upon the procedural infirmities for the purpose of impugning the order
dated 12.03.2020 which was wholly uncalled for.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of the
petitioner.
Once the proclamation was ordered by the Courts below for
putting in appearance on 14.01.2020, the same was required to be for a
clear period of 30 days as prescribed under Section 82 (1) Cr.P.C.
SANJAY GUPTA
2023.04.17 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
CRM-M-27568-2021 neutral citation No. 2023:PHHC:052761
In the present case, the proclamation was effected on
10.01.2020 for 14.01.2020 being the date of appearance i.e. giving only 04
days time for the purpose of appearance to the petitioner, which clearly
falls short of the statutory period of 30 days prescribed under Section 82 (1)
Cr.P.C.
More than that, the petitioner was declared as proclaimed
offender on account of his non-appearance before the Court concerned on
12.03.2020; whereas for the said date, there was no proclamation under
Section 82 (1) Cr.P.C. was either ordered or effected. The provisions of
Section 82 (1) Cr.P.C. provides procedure for appearance of an individual
before the Court in the criminal proceedings and thus, regulates the liberty
of an individual as such it stems from Article 21 of the Constitution of India
and accordingly becomes mandatory and inviolable.
In view of the discussion made hereinabove, once no clear 30
days period was prescribed to the petitioner for the purpose of putting in
appearance before the trial Court, in pursuance to the proclamation
effected under Section 82 Cr.P.C., the order dated 12.03.2020 being
violative of Section 82 Cr.P.C. is thus, liable to be set aside and the same
is accordingly so ordered.
Ordered accordingly.
Petition is thus allowed in the aforesaid terms.
Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.
April 12, 2023 (HARKESH MANUJA)
sanjay JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
SANJAY GUPTA
2023.04.17 15:49
I attest to the accuracy and
