CRM-M-16780 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 144 Rekha Goyal M/s Cinemaster CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. 528 of Bhar 13.08.2024 Magistrate First Class, Viktoria Cineplex filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments I. Act’), whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed 2. grounds and it has been argued by falsely implicated in aware about pendency of the aforementioned co complaint would show that two addresses of the petitioner’s firm have been given in the same mentioned as of is of Bathinda, Punjab. were issued at the wrong addresses, the petitioner 16780-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Rekha Goyal Versus M/s Cinemaster CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. D. S. Matya, Advocate for the petitioner. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 13.08.2024 (Annexure P-17), passed by the Magistrate First Class, Ambala in case titled as Viktoria Cineplex, arising out complaint bearing filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments , whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it has been argued by her counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned complaint aware about pendency of the aforementioned co complaint would show that two addresses of the petitioner’s firm have been in the same. Even the address of the petitioner has been wrongly mentioned as of Madhya Pradesh, whereas the correct address of the petitioner Bathinda, Punjab. It is further submitted that since the warrants/notices were issued at the wrong addresses, the petitioner -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-16780-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 26.03.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section tiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 for quashing of order dated , passed by the Court of learned Judicial case titled as M/s Cinemaster vs. M/s complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘N. , whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed person. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the counsel that the petitioner has been the aforementioned complaint. The petitioner was not aware about pendency of the aforementioned complaint. A perusal of the complaint would show that two addresses of the petitioner’s firm have been . Even the address of the petitioner has been wrongly , whereas the correct address of the petitioner It is further submitted that since the warrants/notices were issued at the wrong addresses, the petitioner was never served with any - 2025 (O&M) 26.03.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section for quashing of order dated Judicial M/s Cinemaster vs. M/s 2322/2019, (for short ‘N. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the counsel that the petitioner has been The petitioner was not . A perusal of the complaint would show that two addresses of the petitioner’s firm have been . Even the address of the petitioner has been wrongly , whereas the correct address of the petitioner It is further submitted that since the warrants/notices was never served with any MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.03.26 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16780 notice/warrants issued by the been declared a proclaimed prescribed under Section 82 to join the Court proceedings. liable to be set aside. 3. length and have also gone through the material placed on record. 4. learned counsel for the parties and on an overall perusal of the orders passed by the learned 82 Cr.P.C. as against the petitioner till the date of declaring him a proclaimed person, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 5. copies of zim 23.05.2024 received back unserved, proclamation against the serving police offici 08.06.2024 at the purported residence of the petitioner at Chowk, Pritampur, Madhya Pradesh, whereas in fact the petitioner was ordinarily residing at Bathinda, Punjab. More so, the notices and warrants issued of proclamation were also not issued at the address of the petitioner, where she was in fact residing i.e. Bathinda, Punjab. Hence, 16780-2025 (O&M) notice/warrants issued by the learned trial Court. been declared a proclaimed person without prescribed under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. Even otherwise, the petitioner is ready to join the Court proceedings. Hence, it is urged that the liable to be set aside. I have heard learned counsel for the and have also gone through the material placed on record. On giving due deliberations to the contentions as raised by learned counsel for the parties and on an overall perusal of the orders passed learned trial Court from the date of initiating proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. as against the petitioner till the date of declaring him a proclaimed , I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 suffers from material illegalities and is liable to be quashed with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. After going through the material placed on reco copies of zimni orders passed by the learned 23.05.2024, since the non-bailable warrants issued against the petitioner were received back unserved, the learned trial Court had ordered for issuance of proclamation against her for 23.05.2024. the serving police official shows that the proclamation was executed on 08.06.2024 at the purported residence of the petitioner at Chowk, Pritampur, Madhya Pradesh, whereas in fact the petitioner was ordinarily residing at Bathinda, Punjab. More so, the notices and warrants issued of proclamation were also not issued at the address of the petitioner, where she was in fact residing i.e. Bathinda, Punjab. Hence, -2- trial Court. Hence, the petitioner had person without following the proper procedure Even otherwise, the petitioner is ready Hence, it is urged that the impugned order is counsel for the petitioner at considerable and have also gone through the material placed on record. On giving due deliberations to the contentions as raised by learned counsel for the parties and on an overall perusal of the orders passed trial Court from the date of initiating proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. as against the petitioner till the date of declaring him a proclaimed , I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated ial illegalities and is liable to be quashed with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. After going through the material placed on record as well as the learned trial Court, it is revealed that on bailable warrants issued against the petitioner were trial Court had ordered for issuance of . A bare perusal of the statement of al shows that the proclamation was executed on 08.06.2024 at the purported residence of the petitioner at Chowk, Pritampur, Madhya Pradesh, whereas in fact the petitioner was ordinarily residing at Bathinda, Punjab. More so, the notices and warrants issued prior to issuance of proclamation were also not issued at the address of the petitioner, where she was in fact residing i.e. Bathinda, Punjab. Hence, it can reasonably be - he petitioner had following the proper procedure Even otherwise, the petitioner is ready impugned order is petitioner at considerable On giving due deliberations to the contentions as raised by learned counsel for the parties and on an overall perusal of the orders passed trial Court from the date of initiating proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. as against the petitioner till the date of declaring him a proclaimed , I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated ial illegalities and is liable to be quashed with rd as well as the revealed that on bailable warrants issued against the petitioner were trial Court had ordered for issuance of the statement of al shows that the proclamation was executed on 08.06.2024 at the purported residence of the petitioner at Chowk, Pritampur, Madhya Pradesh, whereas in fact the petitioner was ordinarily residing at prior to issuance of proclamation were also not issued at the address of the petitioner, where it can reasonably be MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.03.26 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16780 presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, she had no occasion to conceal herself. As such, the action of the learned trial Court by switching to the proclamation proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be placed upon 8663. 6. view of the ratio of law as laid down in above cited authorities petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 17), passed by the case titled as complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019, filed under Section 138 of the N. I. Act, whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 7. Court proceedings which would obviously help in speedy co she is directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of 15 days from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release bail, subject to 8. Court, her 9. the learned trial Court within the stipulated time, this petition shall be dee to be dismissed. 16780-2025 (O&M) presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, she had no n to conceal herself. As such, the action of the learned trial Court by switching to the proclamation proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be placed upon Manjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab : 2013 SCC Online (P&H) Accordingly, in view of the discussion as made above view of the ratio of law as laid down in above cited authorities petition is allowed and the impugned order dated , passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, case titled as M/s Cinemaster vs. M/s Viktoria Cineplex complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019, filed under Section 138 of the , whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is ready to join the Court proceedings which would obviously help in speedy co he is directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of 15 days from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release bail, subject to her furnishing personal/surety bonds to its satisfaction. Till the appearance of the petitioner before the learned trial arrest shall remain stayed. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before the learned trial Court within the stipulated time, this petition shall be dee to be dismissed. -3- presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, she had no n to conceal herself. As such, the action of the learned trial Court by switching to the proclamation proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be te of Punjab : 2013 SCC Online (P&H) Accordingly, in view of the discussion as made above and also in view of the ratio of law as laid down in above cited authorities, the present petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 13.08.2024 (Annexure P Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ambala in M/s Cinemaster vs. M/s Viktoria Cineplex, arising out complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019, filed under Section 138 of the , whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed person quashed with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom. Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is ready to join the Court proceedings which would obviously help in speedy conclusion of trial, he is directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of 15 days from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release her furnishing personal/surety bonds to its satisfaction. Till the appearance of the petitioner before the learned trial It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before the learned trial Court within the stipulated time, this petition shall be deemed - presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, she had no n to conceal herself. As such, the action of the learned trial Court by switching to the proclamation proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be te of Punjab : 2013 SCC Online (P&H) and also in , the present xure P- Ambala in arising out complaint bearing CIS No. NACT/2322/2019, filed under Section 138 of the person, is Keeping in view the fact that the petitioner is ready to join the nclusion of trial, he is directed to surrender before the learned trial Court within a period of 15 her on Till the appearance of the petitioner before the learned trial It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before med MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.03.26 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-16780 10. Rs. 5,000/ which shall further be disbursed to the respondent/complainant. 26.03.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 16780-2025 (O&M) However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/-, to be deposited by the petitioner with the which shall further be disbursed to the respondent/complainant. 25 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -4- However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of , to be deposited by the petitioner with the learned trial Court, which shall further be disbursed to the respondent/complainant. (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No - However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of learned trial Court, MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.03.26 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document