Absconding person should be willfully evading service of summons in order to issue proclamation u/s 82 of CrPC; Summons to be affixed in specified space where he ordinarily resides: P&H HC

Read Order: Balbir Singh son of Jaswant v. Balbir Singh son of Makhan Singh & Another

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, February 1, 2022: While dealing with a petition pertaining to Section 482 of Cr.P.C., challenging the order of Trial Court declaring the accused-petitioner as a proclaimed offender, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. reveals that in order to issue a proclamation for an absconding person, that person should be willfully evading service of the summons and for that reason, the summons is to be affixed in a specified space where he ordinarily resides. 

The Bench of Justice Anoop Chitkara added,  “In the present case, prima facie it is established that when the order dated 02.06.2012 [issue of summons] was passed, the petitioner was not residing in India and was in Canada.”

The matter at hand started with the lodging of an FIR wherein the petitioner was arraigned as an accused and the offences alleged against him were under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barnala took cognizance of the offences and proceeded against the petitioner-accused for the aforesaid offences. Thereafter, the accused could not be served. 

Subsequently, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Barnala declared the petitioner as a proclaimed offender. Aggrieved, the accused- petitioner approached the  High Court with a petition under Section Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of this order. 

The petitioner’s counsel contended that the summoning order was issued in 2012 whereas the petitioner had already left India in 2011 i.e. prior to the issuance of summons. To corroborate his pleadings, the petitioner annexed copies of his passport which revealed that the petitioner reached Canada in May 2011.  

The High Court perused the impugned order and observed that the complainant made a statement to the concerned Court that he had compromised the matter with one of the accused Jaswinder Singh and also requested for dismissal of the complaint as withdrawn. Based on the said statement, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered that the case file be consigned to the record room and ordered it to be taken up as and when the accused appears/surrenders before the Court.

Lastly, the Court also observed that the State did not dispute the authenticity of copies of passport. 

Given above, the petition was allowed and the impugned order was quashed.