The Punjab & Haryana High Court has set aside an order declaring an accused a proclaimed offender, while also publicly appreciating a Sessions Judge for adopting an eco-conscious practice of printing multiple judicial orders on the same sheet to avoid unnecessary paper waste, an observation that stands out for its wider institutional impact beyond the case itself.
The case stemmed from a petition challenging an April 2021 order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, which had declared the petitioner a proclaimed offender in a case registered under Sections 363 and 366-A of the IPC and Section 12 of the POCSO Act. The petitioner maintained that the relationship was consensual, that the woman had later married him, and that he had gone abroad without knowledge that interim protection granted earlier had been vacated. He argued that the proclamation was issued mechanically, without following mandatory safeguards, seriously affecting his personal liberty.
Examining the record, the High Court found that the trial court had proceeded in undue haste. It noted the absence of any recorded satisfaction that the accused had absconded or was deliberately evading arrest, an essential statutory requirement before issuing a proclamation. The Court underscored that there was no material showing prior service of summons or warrants, nor any report from the executing agency to justify the extreme step taken.
Justice Neerja K. Kalson held that declaring a person a proclaimed offender without adhering to the mandatory procedure strikes at the very foundation of a fair trial. The Court observed that such proclamations “constitute a serious step, which curtails personal liberty,” and therefore the statutory safeguards “cannot be dispensed with in haste.” Consequently, the impugned proclamation order and all consequential proceedings were quashed, with directions to the petitioner to appear before the trial court within two weeks and seek bail, which was ordered to be decided expeditiously.
Before concluding, the Court made a noteworthy institutional observation, appreciating the trial judge for ensuring “optimum utilization of papers” by printing orders on the same sheet wherever possible, calling it “a commendable example in avoiding the needless waste of paper,” and reminding courts that paper is a “precious resource” requiring prudent use.
Case Title: XX Vs. State of Punjab
Case No.: CRM-M-3742-2026 (O&M)
Coram: Justice Neerja K. Kalson
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Karan Bhardwaj
Advocate for Respondent: None
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
