SAMSHER S ER SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER

Mr. Ambanshu Sahni, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punj , Punjab. ***** RUPINDERJ DERJIT CHAHAL, J. (ORAL)

1. The present petition has been pref f the en preferred under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nag a Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, 2023, assailing the impugned order dated 08.07.20 .07.2022 (Annexure P-10), whereby t ereby the learned JMIC, Gidderbaha has declared th ared the petitioner as a proclaimed per person.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner 2 ner submits that respondent No.2 filed an applic application under Section 156(3) of th dure, ) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, seeking eking issuance of directions to the S 1). the SHO, Kotbhai (Annexure P-1). He further sub er submits that the said application w tion was treated as a complaint case bearing No. C No. COMI/41/2019, and the petition etitioner along with the co-accused was summone moned to face trial vide order dated It dated 18.01.2020 (Annexure P-2). It GURPREET 2026.02.25 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-4172 41723-2025 2 is further subm r submitted that thereafter, the petiti n9ble petitioner approached the Hon9ble Court seeking eking the concession of anticipatory b - atory bail by way of CRM-M-8930- 2020, wherein herein the co-accused was granted a s the nted anticipatory bail, whereas the same relief wa lief was declined to the petitioner (An er (Annexure P-3). Learned counsel further submit ubmits that a compromise dated 20.05 20.05.2025 has since been effected between the pa the parties (Annexure P-11).

3. He further argued that petitione titioner was never served with any notice/warrant arrant. The impugned order has b is of has been passed on the basis of statement of t of serving official (Annexure P re P-5) and it is amply clear that requirements o ents of section 82 Cr.P.C. (section 8 ion 84 BNSS) were not complied with. He furth e further submits that the petitioner un e the ner undertakes to appear before the trial Court on urt on each and every date of hearing. aring. Hence, he prays for quashing of the said ord id order.

5. Notice of motion. Ms. Aiman J. Chishti, AAG, Punj lf of , Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-Sta State and supports the impugne t the pugned order, contending that the petitioner deli r deliberately avoided appearance, le h no nce, leaving the trial Court with no option but to is ut to issue proclamation to secure his p re his presence.

6. I have heard learned counsel fo sel for the parties and perused the record.

7. The criminal justice system, tho nt of , though permitting curtailment of personal libert l liberty, mandates that such deprivatio o the rivation must strictly conform to the procedure esta re established by law. The said proc , and d procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable in t le in terms of Article 21 of the Consti Constitution of India. GURPREET 2026.02.25 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-4172 41723-2025 3

8. A co-ordinate Bench of this C 21 this Court in CRM-M-14175-2021 titled "Anita S ita Sharma v. State of Punjab ", da , has , date of decision 26.03.2021, has summarized th ized the essential requirements of Sect f Section 82 Cr.P.C. as under:- "(i) Prior issuance of war sine qua non for issua proclamation and the Cou arrest against the person c State of Delhi: 2008 Crl. report before the Court t warrant was issued ha concealing himself so that be executed against him. bound to take evidence in Proclamation under Sectio Rohit Kumar v. State of De Court cannot issue the P course because the Police i be prima facie satisfied tha is concealing himself so previously issued, cannot b diligence. (See Bishunda Emperor: AIR 1943 Patna v. State of U.P.: 1994 Crl The requisite date and p specified in the proclamat appear on such date at th must not be less than 30 issuance an publication GurappaGugal and others 826 and Shokat Ali v. St (Criminal) 339). (v) Where and publication of the pr date of hearing is less t cannot be declared a procl proclamation has to be iss Dilbagh Singh v. State of (criminal) 166 and Ashok K another : 2013 (4) RCR Proclamation has to be p down in Section 82(2) of th proclamation has to be conspicuous place of the accused ordinarily reside affixed to some conspic homestead in which the ac some conspicuous place thereafter a copy of the pro warrant of arrest by the Court is t is ssuance and publication of the Court has to first issue warrant of t of on concerned. (See Rohit Kumar v. r v. e a rl. J. 2561). (ii) There must be a rt that the person against whom had absconded or had been that the warrant of arrest could not him. However, the Court is not e in this regard before issuing a a See ection 82(1) of the Cr.P.C.. (See f Delhi:2008Crl. J. 2561). (iii) The he Proclamation as a matter of lice is asking for it. The Court must d that the person has absconded or f so that the warrant of arrest, est, ot be executed, despite reasonable v. undayal Mahton and others v. atna 366 and Devender Singh Negi (iv) Crl LJ (Allahabad HC) 1783). (iv) d place for appearance must be amation requiring such person to at the specified place. Such date 30 clear days from the date of tion of the proclamation. (See See iLJ hers v. State of Mysore 1969 CriLJ CR . State of Haryna: 2020(2) RCR here the period between issuance e proclamation and the specified ss than thirty days, the accused roclaimed person/offender and the e issued and published again. (See See CR of Punjab (P&II): 2015 (8) RCR ok Kumar v. State of Haryana and RCR (Criminal) 550) (vi) The be published in the manner laid of the Cr.P.C. For publication, the be first publicly read in some the town or village in which the sides; then the same has to be spicuous part of the house or e accused ordinarily resides or to ce of such town or village and e proclamation has to be affixed to GURPREET 2026.02.25 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-4172 41723-2025 4 some conspicuous part o subclauses (a)-(c) in Sectio conjunctive and not disjun would be no valid publicat all the three modes of p Pawan Kumar Gupta v. T 1368). Where the Court proclamation has to be ad newspaper circulating in t ordinarily resides. Advisa issued with four copies s copies of the proclamati conspicuous part of the ho accused ordinarily resides, such town or village and to Courthouse and report re made on the fourth copy o copy will be required wh required to be publishe Statement of the serving of Court as to the date and proclamation. (See Birad D viii) The Court issuing the statement in writing in its was duly published on a specified in Section 82( statement in writing by conclusive evidence that th have been complied with a published on such day. (S CriLJ 965). (xi) The condit of the Cr.P.C. for the pu against an absconder compliance therewith cann the Proc subsequent thereto a nulli alias Debu v. State of U.P. and Pal Singh v. The State: rt of the Court-house. The three ection 82 (2)(i) of the Cr.P.C. are isjunctive, which means that there lication of the proclamation unless See of publication are proved. (See iLJ v. The State of W.B.: 1973 CriLJ ourt so orders a copy of the additionally published in a daily in the place in which the accused visably, proclamation has to be es so that one each of the three mation may be affixed to some e house or homestead in which the ides, to some conspicuous place of nd to some conspicuous part of the rt regarding publication may be py of the proclamation. Additional where the proclamation is also the newspaper. (vii) vii) lished g officer has to be recorded by the and mode of publication of the ad Dan v. State: 1958 CriLJ 965). 5). g the proclamation has to make a e a n its order that the proclamation on a specified day in a manner 82(2)(i) of the Cr.P.C.. Such by the Court is declared to be 82 at the requirements of Section 82 ith and that the proclamation was 58 y. (See Birad Dan v. State: 1958 (2) nditions specified in Section 82(2) e publication of a Proclamation - er are mandatory. Any non- ity' cannot be cured as an 'irregularity' Proclamation and proceedings nullity. (See Devendra Singh Negi 83 U.P. and another 1994 CriLJ 1783 tate: 1955 CriLJ 318)". renders

9. A perusal of the impugned ord ed order and statement of serving official reveal reveals that the procedure prescrib .P.C. escribed under section 82 Cr.P.C. (section 84 BN 84 BNSS) was not complied with. e of with. Section 82(2) of the Code of Criminal Pro l Procedure lays down the proce of a procedure for publication of a proclamation. ation. The three conditions, containe c) of ntained in sub-clauses (a) to (c) of GURPREET 2026.02.25 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. CRM-M-4172 41723-2025 5 Section 82(2) 82(2)(i), are cumulative in nature nature. In other words, a valid proclamation c ation can be said to have been made es of made only when all three modes of publication are ion are duly complied with and proved proved.

10. The object behind issuance o s or nce of non-bailable warrants or proclamation i ation is only to secure the presence o sence of the accused. In the present case, the petiti e petitioner has voluntarily approached en to oached this Court and undertaken to appear before efore the trial Court regularly.

11. In view of the foregoing discussio . The scussion, the petition is allowed. The impugned orde d order dated 08.07.2022 (Annexure exure P-10), declaring the petitioner proclaimed off ed offender, is set aside and he is dire is directed to appear before the trial Court within f ithin four weeks from today. Upon his on his doing so, he shall be released on bail subjec subject to furnishing requisite bail b bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of ion of the trial Court.

12. Besides, petitioner will also su lso submit an undertaking/affidavit that he will ke will keep appearing during the procee roceedings of the trial in future and proceedings w ings will not be delayed because of his of his conduct.

13. It is made clear that in case, petiti e the , petitioner fails to appear before the trial court wit rt within the stipulated period, this o be , this order shall be deemed to be vacated.

14. The present petition is disposed o osed of accordingly.

17.02.2026 Gurpreet GURPREET 2026.02.25 09:02 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document. AL) (RUPINDERJIT CHAHAL) JUDGE i) Whether speaking/reasoned? Yes/N `ii) Whether reportable? Yes/No Yes/No