CRM-M-28670 v. SURYA PARTAP SINGH

, hereinafter being referred to as ‘trial Court is under challenge in trial Court’ only, is under challenge in the present petition. The present petition has been the present petition has been filed under Section 528 528 of ereinafter referred to as Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, hereinafter referred to as Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita only. ‘BNSS’ only

2. he learned trial Court By virtue of abovementioned order, the learned trial Court By virtue of abovementioned order, t fence punishable under while holding a trial for the commission of offence punishable under while holding a trial for the commission of o while holding a trial for the commission of o Sections s 153A, 499 of Indian Penal Code, to be of Indian Penal Code, declared the petitioner to be proclaimed person. proclaimed GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28670 28670-2026 (O&M) 2

3. shell, the facts emerging from record are that the In nut-shell, the facts emerging from record are that the shell, the facts emerging from record are that the facing a trial for the commission of offence punishable petitioners were facing a trial for the commission of offence punishable facing a trial for the commission of offence punishable petitioner under Sections Sections 153A, 499 of IPC, and in the abovementioned case due to in the abovementioned case due to non-appearance, on various occasions appearance, on various occasions, non issued non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner. However, the same could not be e against the petitioner. H owever, the same could not be executed.

4. Subsequently, on 17.02.2025, issued on 17.02.2025, the learned trial Court issued proclamation against the petitioner for 29 proclamation against the petitioner for and directed to publish 29.03.2025 and directed to publish the same on or before 26.02.2025. On 29.03.2025 the same on or before 26.02.2025 statement of serving 29.03.2025 the statement of serving official was recorded with regard to execution of proclamation on was recorded with regard to execution of proclamation on with regard to execution of proclamation on

20.02.2025 and thereafter, by virtue of impugned order 20.02.2025 .2025, by virtue of impugned order, dated 29.03.2025 the learned trial Court declared the petitioner the learned trial Court the petitioner to be proclaimed person.

5. on the The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the The present petition has been filed by the petitioner that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and ground that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law and as the necessary procedure, prescribed under Section deserves to be quashed, as the necessary procedure, prescribed under Section as the necessary procedure, prescribed under Section deserves to 84 of the BNSS (erstwhile Section 82 of CrPC), 84 of the complied with (erstwhile Section 82 of CrPC), was not complied with while declaring the petitioner to be a proclaimed person while declaring the petitioner With regard to proclaimed person. With regard to , it has been specifically alleged by above, it has been specifically alleged by the petitioner that the proclamation the petitioner that the proclamation under the law. was not publicly read, as prescribed under the law. was not publicly read, as prescribed

7. Notice of motion. appears Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab appears Mr. Eklavya Darshi, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab on behalf of respondent-State. Hence service of notice on behalf of respondent Hence service of notice upon the State upon the State is hereby dispensed with. hereby dispensed with.

8. Heard. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28670 28670-2026 (O&M) 3

9. It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the learned It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the learned It has been contended on behalf of petitioner that the learned trial Court has committed an error, when without following due process it trial Court has committed an error, when without following due process trial Court has committed an error, when without following due process trial Court has committed an error, when without following due process declared the petitioner to be proclaimed person. According to learned declared the petitioner to be proclaimed person. According to le declared the petitioner to be proclaimed person. According to le , one of the basic steps to be taken during the counsel for the petitioner, one of the basic steps to be taken during the , one of the basic steps to be taken during the counsel for the petitioner course of proclamation was the reading of proclamation at a public place, course of proclamation was the reading of proclamation at a public plac course of proclamation was the reading of proclamation at a public plac course of proclamation was the reading of proclamation at a public plac and that in the present case the executing and that in the present case not publicly read the the executing official did not publicly read the proclamation at a public place. As per learned proclamation at a public place. the petitioner, As per learned counsel for the petitioner ted by the learned trial Court, because of defective procedure adopted by the learned trial Court because of defective procedure adop impugned order is liable to be set aside. impugned order is liable to be set aside

11. The The learned learned State Counsel State Counsel controverted controverted present case, the abovementioned arguments. He has contended that in the present case, the abovementioned arguments. He has contended abovementioned arguments. He has contended petitioner is the person, who right from the very petitioner aware of the person, who right from the very beginning, was aware of the not to appear before pendency of criminal proceedings against her, but opted not to appear before pendency of criminal proceedings against pendency of criminal proceedings against for long. As per learned State Counsel, in the Court and remained absent for long. As per learned State Counsel, in for long. As per learned State Counsel, in the Court and remained absent view of above, the petitioner cannot draw view of above technical defect, cannot draw any benefit of the technical defect, have occurred inadvertently, in the process of declaring if any, which might have occurred inadvertently, in the process of declaring have occurred inadvertently, in the process of declaring if any, which might the petitioner petitioner to be proclaimed person.

13. The record has been perused carefully. The record has been perused carefully. placed on A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner has placed on A perusal of the record shows that the petitioner ha record the the copy of statement of executing recorded by the learned xecuting official, recorded by the learned trial Court, before declaring the petitioner trial Court, . The the petitioner to be a proclaimed person. The statement of executing official, namely PHG Lakha Singh statement of

29.03.2025, PHG Lakha Singh dated 29.03.2025 reads as under:- reads as under proclamation under section 82 CrPC of “Stated that I received proclamation under section 82 CrPC of proclamation under section 82 CrPC of accused Amandeep Kaur daughter of Lal Singh, Flat No.35, accused Amandeep Kaur daughter of Lal Singh, Flat No.35, accused Amandeep Kaur daughter of Lal Singh, Flat No.35, Block Amritsar was ordered to be executed Ranjit Avenue C-Block Amritsar was ordered to be executed Block Amritsar was ordered to be executed GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28670 28670-2026 (O&M) 4 I along with ASI Dilbag Singh No.730/TT, went to through me. I along with ASI Dilbag Singh No.730/TT, went to I along with ASI Dilbag Singh No.730/TT, went to said place and took Pardhan Dalip Kumar son of late Des Raj said place and took Pardhan Dalip Kumar son of late Des Raj said place and took Pardhan Dalip Kumar son of late Des Raj Block, Amritsar with us resident of Flat No.40 Ranjit Avenue C-Block, Amritsar with us resident of Flat No.40 Ranjit Avenue C on 20.02.2025. We went to above said address of accused and on 20.02.2025. We went to above said address of accused and on 20.02.2025. We went to above said address of accused and accused was locked. Accused was not found that house of the accused was locked. Accused was not accused was locked. Accused was not present in his house. Then I affixed one copy of proclamation at present in his house. Then I affixed one copy of proclamation at present in his house. Then I affixed one copy of proclamation at the door of his house and I affixed one copy of the proclamation the door of his house and I affixed one copy of the proclamation the door of his house and I affixed one copy of the proclamation at the common place of the village and one copy on the notice at the common place of the village and one copy on the notice at the common place of the village and one copy on the notice lamation of accused is Ex.PD, board of the court. The proclamation of accused is Ex.PD, board of the court. The proc whereas on which my report is Ex.PE. Statement of said whereas on which my report is Ex.PE. Statement of said whereas on which my report is Ex.PE. Statement of said Pardhan is Ex.PF. Same is in my hand which bears my Pardhan is Ex.PF. Same is in my hand which bears my Pardhan is Ex.PF. Same is in my hand which bears my signature.”

14. mentioned statement of the A bare perusal of the above-mentioned statement of the A bare perusal of the ab xecuting official shows that the above- executing had not -named executing official had not publicly read the contents of abovementioned publicly read the contents of The order dated abovementioned proclamation. The order dated

29.03.2025 shows that on the basis of above 29.03.2025 mentioned statement of the on the basis of abovementioned statement of the xecuting official, the petitioner has been declared executing been declared a proclaimed person.

15. mentioned procedure adopted by the With regard to the above-mentioned procedure adopted by the mentioned procedure adopted by the xecuting official, it is relevant to mention executing CrPC , it is relevant to mention here that Section 82(2) of CrPC lays down that following steps are necessary to be taken before declaring a lays down that following steps are necessary to be taken before declaring a lays down that following steps are necessary to be taken before declaring a lays down that following steps are necessary to be taken before declaring a person to be a proclaimed person:- person to be a proclaimed person: “(2) The proclamation shall be published as follows: The proclamation shall be published as follows:- (i) (a) it shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place (i) (a) it shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place (i) (a) it shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place of the town or village in which such person of the town or village in which such person of the town or village in which such person ordinarily resides; ordinarily resides; (b) it shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the it shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the it shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the house or homestead which such person in which such person house or homestead ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village; such town or village; a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous (c) a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the Court-house; part of the Court GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28670 28670-2026 (O&M) 5 (ii) the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of o be published in a daily the proclamation to be published in a daily the proclamation t newspaper circulating in the place in which such newspaper circulating in the place in which such newspaper circulating in the place in which such person ordinarily resides.” person ordinarily resides.”

16. With regard to mandatory nature of above mentioned procedure, rd to mandatory nature of abovementioned procedure, it has been repeatedly observed by this Court, that the compliance of it has been repeatedly observed by this Court, that the compliance of it has been repeatedly observed by this Court, that the compliance of it has been repeatedly observed by this Court, that the compliance of abovementioned provisions of Section 82(2) of abovementioned provisions of Section is mandatory in nature. (2) of CrPC is mandatory in nature. in letter It has also been held that in case the above process is not followed in letter It has also been held that in case the above process is not It has also been held that in case the above process is not order declaring a person to be a proclaimed and spirit, the impugned order declaring a person to be a proclaimed order declaring a person to be a proclaimed and spirit, offender/proclaimed person is defective. offender/proclaimed person is defective.

17. that the In addition to above, it is also relevant to mention here that the In addition to above, it is also relevant to mention statement of where depicts that the proclamation was ement of executing official nowhere depicts that the proclamation was where depicts that the proclamation was read over at a public place in the area where the petitioner read over ordinarily reside, at a public place in the area where the petitioners ordinarily reside, impugned order as prescribed under Section 82(2)(i)(a) Cr.P.C., and the impugned order as prescribed under Section 82(2)(i)(a) Cr.P.C., as prescribed under Section 82(2)(i)(a) Cr.P.C., declaring the abovesaid persons to be proclaimed person declaring the above is defective and to be proclaimed persons is defective and not sustainable in the eyes of law. not sustainable in the eyes of law.

18. Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab & This Court in the cases of ‘Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab & Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr.’ CRM Gagandeep Singh v. State of Punjab’ CRM-M-27944 of 2024 and ‘Gagandeep Singh v. State of Punjab Gagandeep Singh v. State of Punjab CRM-M-50704 50704-2024, has observed that if a proclamation is not read at a observed that if a proclamation is not read at a village in which such person ordinarily conspicuous place of the town or village in which such person ordinarily village in which such person ordinarily conspicuous place of the town or resides, as prescribed under Section 82(2) resides, as (i)(a), the order declaring the prescribed under Section 82(2)(i)(a), the order declaring the offender is defective abovesaid person to be a proclaimed person/proclaimed offender is defective abovesaid person to be a proclaimed person/proclaimed abovesaid person to be a proclaimed person/proclaimed n by this and not sustainable in the eyes of law. Similar view has been taken by this and not sustainable in the eyes of law. Similar view has been and not sustainable in the eyes of law. Similar view has been High Court in the cases of ‘Pal Singh Santa Singh v. State High Court in the cases of Punjab Pal Singh Santa Singh v. State’ AIR 1955 Punjab Tajinder Singh v. State of Punjab’ 18 and ‘Tajinder Singh v. State of Punjab ’ in CRM-M-21736-2024. GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-28670 28670-2026 (O&M) 6

19. Taking Taking into consideration into consideration the cumulative effect of the cumulative effect abovementioned factors, as abovementioned fact was a defect there was a defect in the process proclamation, i.e. non-reading of proclamation proclamation the order proclamation in public place, the order dated 29.03.2025

29.03.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is hereby held to be learned trial Court is hereby held to be perverse, defective and unsustainable in the eyes sustainable in the eyes of law.

20. As a sequel to abovementioned observations present abovementioned observations, the present petition is hereby allowed and the impugned order dated petition is passed the impugned order dated 29.03.2025 passed by the learned trial Court is hereby quashed by the learned trial Court is hereby quashed.

21. Gaurav Thakur Whether speaking/reasoned Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Whether reportable :Yes/No :Yes/No : Yes/No : Yes/ GAURAV THAKUR 2026.05.20 15:37 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document