Punjab and Haryana HC quashes proclaimed person order in cheating case

The trial court initiated proclamation proceedings in December 2022 and declared him a proclaimed person on February 24, 2023, after he did not appear.

Justice Goel found multiple flaws in the process. He noted that the execution report did not show that the proclamation was publicly read out in a conspicuous place in the town or village where the petitioner ordinarily resided, which is a compulsory requirement.

He further pointed out that the trial court did not record the necessary judicial satisfaction that the petitioner was deliberately absconding or concealing himself to avoid arrest.

Justice Goel stated: “This Court finds that the course adopted by the Court below is in clear contravention of, and antithetical to, the provisions of Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court below has committed a manifest illegality by issuing and acting upon the proclamation without ensuring compliance with the mandatory statutory requirements.”

The judge emphasised that the provisions for proclamation are mandatory and any failure to follow them makes the entire process invalid.

He said: “The law is well settled that no person can be declared a proclaimed offender/person unless the procedure prescribed under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is strictly and meticulously adhered to. It is trite that the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. are mandatory in nature, and any non-compliance thereof vitiates the entire proceedings.”

Relying on an earlier coordinate bench judgment in ‘Sonu v. State of Haryana’ (2021), Justice Goel listed key requirements for a valid proclamation, including prior issuance of an arrest warrant, court satisfaction of absconding, a minimum 30 days for appearance, public reading of the proclamation, affixing copies at specified places, and a written court statement confirming proper publication.

‘Trial court acted in mechanical manner’

Justice Goel ruled that the lower court acted in a mechanical manner and declared: “The learned Court below, while declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed person, failed to record the requisite judicial satisfaction regarding due execution of the proclamation and proceeded in a mechanical and perfunctory manner, rendering the impugned order legally unsustainable.”

The high court allowed the petition, quashed the February 24, 2023, order, and set aside all subsequent proceedings arising from it.

Legal observers noted that the ruling reinforces strict adherence to proclamation rules, especially when the accused is abroad. Similar arguments have been raised in other pending matters before the same high court, including a recent petition by Aam Aadmi Party MLA Harmit Singh Pathanmajra, who is challenging his proclaimed person status while residing in Australia in a separate case registered in Patiala.