Sarabjeet Singh vs State Of Punjab
2023 Latest Caselaw 1445 P&H

          CRM-M-3587-2023




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

                                                       CRM-M-3587-2023
                                                       Date of Decision: January 23, 2023

          Sarabjeet Singh
                                                                                    .....Petitioner
                                                      Versus
          State of Punjab
                                                                                  .....Respondent

          CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA

          Present:              Mr. Hitesh Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner.

                                                        *****

HARKESH MANUJA, J (ORAL)

By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,

prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 11.11.2002 passed

by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur; whereby the petitioner

was declared as proclaimed offender.

The facts of the case are that the petitioner along with one

Arjan Singh was implicated in FIR No.0044 dated 18.04.2000, under

Sections 420, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station City Gurdaspur, at

the instance of one Charan Dass. In the aforesaid FIR, the petitioner was

granted concession of regular bail. Upon investigation, the challan was

presented against the petitioner as well as co-accused Arjan Singh by the

investigating agency on 05.07.2000. Thereafter petitioner went abroad in

order to seek employment etc.

On account of non-appearance of the petitioner before the trial

Court, he was ordered to be declared as proclaimed offender on

11.11.2002 by the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurdaspur. Later vide

SANJAY GUPTA 2023.01.24 13:23

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-3587-2023

judgment dated 02.12.2005, co-accused, namely, Arjan Singh was

acquitted of the charges.

It is the case of the petitioner that for all these 22 years, the

petitioner never visited India and now at the age of around 50 years, he

intends to come back to his mother-land so as to meet his relatives and

other friends etc. including his old aged mother.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a perusal of the

order dated 11.11.2002 itself shows that at that point of time, the petitioner

was out of country and this fact was known to the investigating agency and

despite that no efforts was ever made to serve the petitioner through other

mode like Embassy. He also submits that keeping in view the fact that co-

accused, namely, Arjan Singh stands acquitted way-back on 02.12.2005

and the evidence against him also remains the same, no useful purpose

would be served by trying the petitioner, based on the same very evidence.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Tarun Aggarwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab, who is present in Court,

accepts notice on behalf of the respondent State and stated that the

petitioner has escaped the process of law for a period of almost 20 years

and thus, does not deserve any concession from the Court.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through

the paper-book. I find that though the petitioner despite having initially

submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court, having granted the concession of

bail, left the country without seeking any permission, however, without

justifying or finding the escape of the petitioner from the process of Court to

be lawful, in the facts and circumstances of the present case, wherein

SANJAY GUPTA 2023.01.24 13:23

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-3587-2023

with the same evidence, the other co-accused stands acquitted of the

similar charges, no useful purpose is going to be served by denying the

petitioner to face the process of law.

Taking into consideration the fact that co-accused of the

petitioner has already been acquitted, this petition is disposed of with a

direction that petitioner will put in appearance before the Illaqa Magistrate

within a period of four weeks from today. The petitioner will not be arrested

in India on his arrival on the basis of the order dated 11.11.2002 declaring

him a proclaimed offender. Thereafter, petitioner shall file his regular

bail application along with bail bonds and surety bonds which shall be

accepted by the trial Court to its satisfaction. In case the prosecution

agency opts to present supplementary challan against the petitioner, the

trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial

within a period of three months after the appearance of the petitioner

before it.

The above relief has been granted to the petitioner solely on

the ground that counsel for the petitioner has assured that the petitioner is

ready to return to India and join the stream of law by appearing before the

Court. If the petitioner does not appear within the above said period, this

petition will be deemed to have been dismissed.

Considering the delay in approaching this Court at the hands of

petitioners, the aforesaid order shall be subject to payment of Rs.50000/-

(Rupees Fifty thousand only) to be deposited with the Punjab and Haryana

High Court Association Lawyer's Welfare Fund having Account

SANJAY GUPTA 2023.01.24 13:23

I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M-3587-2023

No.41564846387 with State Bank of India, High Court Branch, Chandigarh,

while moving application for regular bail before the trial Court.

          January 23, 2023                                [HARKESH MANUJA]
            sanjay                                             JUDGE

                     Whether speaking/reasoned             yes/no
                     Whether reportable?                   yes/no




SANJAY GUPTA
2023.01.24 13:23

I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document