Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kulwant Singh vs State Of Punjab on 16 April, 2024
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051416
CRM-M-11528-2024 1 2024:PHHC:051416
122
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-11528-2024
Date of decision :16.04.2024
Kulwant Singh ...Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present : Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.Kewal Krishan, Addl.AG, Punjab.
****
HARKESH MANUJA.J. (ORAL)
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
prayer has been made for quashing order dated 28.11.2005 passed by
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Taran Taran vide which the petitioner has been
declared as proclaimed offender.
2. Briefly stating, the petitioner has been implicated in the present
FIR No. 57 dated 18.05.2000, under Sections 323/324/148/149 IPC
registered at Police Station Sarai Amanat Khan, District Tarn Taran, wherein
challan was filed by the investigating agency on 11.06.2001 against the
petitioner and charges were framed on 18.08.2001. The petitioner, on
account of his absence before the trial Court, was declared as proclaimed
offender vide order dated 28.11.2005.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the declaration
of the petitioner as proclaimed offender was in violation of Section 82 of the
1 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051416
CRM-M-11528-2024 2 2024:PHHC:051416
Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) as no steps under Section 105 of the
Cr.P.C. were taken so as to serve the petitioner who was away to
Hongkong/Japan at the relevant point of time and the proceedings carried
out against him were vitiated. He also points out that during trial, on
account of the prosecution witnesses not supporting the case, the other co-
accused have been acquitted vide judgment dated 01.11.2008. Further he
also submits that the petitioner is ready to surrender himself before the trial
Court and face proceedings and also to pay a reasonable cost.
4. On the other hand, prayer made by the petitioner has been
opposed by learned State counsel by submitting that the petitioner being
conscious of the fact that proceedings were going on against him
deliberately chose not to appear before the trial Court and went abroad. He
further submits that despite the fact that the petitioner came back to India on
09.11.2008, he never chose to submit himself to the trial Court for a long
period of more than 15 years and thus the impugned order warrants no
interference.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through
the record with their able assistance.
6. I find substance in the submissions made on behalf of learned
counsel for the petitioner. In the present case the proclamation under
Section 82 of the Cr.PC. against the petitioner was issued by the trial Court
on 18.02.2005 for 01.06.2005. The same having not been effected, fresh
proclamation was issued on 21.09.2005 for 28.11.2005 which came to be
effected on 28.10.2005. and then on 28.11.2005 he was declared as
proclaimed offender. Upon comparison of the proclamation to the passport
entries of the petitioner which have been annexed as Annexure P-4, it can be
2 of 3
Neutral Citation No:=2024:PHHC:051416
CRM-M-11528-2024 3 2024:PHHC:051416
traced out that the petitioner left the country on 06.02.2002 for Hongkong
and came back to Delhi on 09.11.2008 and as such the proclamation effected
under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. qua him on 28.11.12005 was meaningless as
he was never afforded a chance to surrender himself before the court
concerned in pursuance to any valid proclamation in terms of Section 82 of
the Cr.P.C. read with Section 105 thereof. Moreover, the other co-accused
have already been acquitted by the trial Court vide order dated 01.11.2008
on account of prosecution witnesses not supporting its case. Further more,
the petitioner volunteers to furnish medical equipments in the name of
General Hospital, at Tarn Taran within a period of 10 days from today so as
to serve public cause.
7. As a cumulative analysis of the discussion hereinabove, the
present petition is allowed and impugned order dated 28.11.2005 declaring
the petitioner as proclaimed offender including the consequential
proceedings arising therefrom, is set aside.
( HARKESH MANUJA)
JUDGE
16.04.2024
sunita Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No
Whether Reportable ? Yes/No
3 of 3
