Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gursharan Singh vs State Of Punjab on 29 January, 2024
123 2024:PHHC:011771
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-3967-2024
Date of Decision: January 29, 2024
GURSHARAN SINGH ........Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF PUNJAB ........Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA
Present: Mr. Ramandeep, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Shubham Kaushik, A.A.G., Punjab.
****
HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL)
1. By way of present petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.,
prayer has been made for quashing of order dated 30.11.2017 passed
by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala in FIR
No.31 dated 28.04.2017 under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 506, 148
and 149 of IPC whereby, the petitioner was declared as proclaimed
offender.
2. Having been implicated in FIR No.31, dated 28.04.2017,
under Sections 307, 326, 324, 323, 506, 148 and 149 IPC, registered
at Police Station Dera Baba Nanak, District Batala, the petitioner was
later declared as proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2017.
3. The aforesaid order has been impugned by learned counsel
for the petitioner while submitting that the petitioner went to Australia in
May, 2017 for educational purposes whereas, he was declared as
2024:PHHC:011771 -2-
CRM-M-3967-2024
proclaimed person vide order dated 30.11.2017 without following the
procedure of the law laid down under Section 105 of CrPC and thus the
said order was bad in the eyes of law.
4. On the other hand, learned State counsel opposes the
prayer made herein while submitting that the petitioner, despite having
knowledge about the pendency of proceedings against him, tried to
evade the process of law.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone
through the paper-book. I find substance in the submissions made by
learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. The petitioner was not in India and thus, before declaring
him as proclaimed offender, the procedure as laid down under Section
105 Cr.P.C. was required to be initiated which provides for the
procedure to serve summons and warrants to accused residing outside
India and in the absence of having followed the same, the declaration of
petitioner as proclaimed offender by proceeding under Section 82 (2)
Cr.P.C. only was patently illegal. Since Chapter VI of Cr.P.C. regulates
the liberty of an individual, therefore, it has to be strictly construed and
no individual can be proceeded against under the same in a casual
manner. My aforesaid view has been derived from judgment passed by
a Coordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-33794-2017, titled as
"Balkar Singh vs. State of Punjab and another", decided on
23.03.2023 and CRM M-37446-2022 titled as Vikramjeet Singh
@Vikram Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others, decided on 13.01.2023.
2024:PHHC:011771 -3-
CRM-M-3967-2024
7. Thus, in view of the discussion made herein above as well
as keeping in mind the law laid down in the aforesaid judgments, the
present petition is allowed. Order dated 30.11.2017 passed by the
Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala, declaring the
petitioner as proclaimed person, is hereby quashed.
8. However, the above-said order shall be subject to payment
of costs of Rs.40,000/- to be deposited in equal shares with Punjab and
Haryana High Court Association Lawyer's Family Welfare Fund and
Poor Patients' Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.
9. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
29.01.2024 (HARKESH MANUJA)
Tejwinder JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
