CRM-M-17570 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND 144 Ankur Bansal State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Present:- MANISHA BATRA, J. 1. 528 of Bhar 04.03.2025 Magistrate out of FIR No. Act, 1959 petitioner had been declared a proclaimed 2. grounds and it has been argued by his counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in during investigati trial Court, he has an application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. left India for Canada on 17.06.2024 i.e. much prior to passing of aforesaid summoning order. He 17570-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Ankur Bansal Versus State of Punjab CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Mr. Amandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. MANISHA BATRA, J. (Oral) The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 04.03.2025 (Annexure P-5), passed by the Magistrate First Class, Mansa in case titled as out of FIR No. 94 dated 24.07.2019, registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City 2 Mansa, District Mansa petitioner had been declared a proclaimed The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it has been argued by his counsel that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case during investigation but vide order dated 18.09.2024, trial Court, he has now been summoned as an additional accused on allowing an application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. left India for Canada on 17.06.2024 i.e. much prior to passing of aforesaid ning order. He was not aware about pendency of the aforementioned -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-17570-2025 (O&M) Date of decision: 01.04.2025 ...Petitioner Versus ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA Amandeep Singh Sandhu, Advocate Ms. Ruchika Sabherwal, Sr. DAG, Punjab. 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 titled as State vs. Jasdev Singh, arising , registered under Section 25 of the Arms City 2 Mansa, District Mansa, whereby the person. tition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it has been argued by his counsel that the petitioner has been case. Initially, he was found innocent vide order dated 18.09.2024, passed by the learned been summoned as an additional accused on allowing an application filed under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. However, the petitioner had left India for Canada on 17.06.2024 i.e. much prior to passing of aforesaid was not aware about pendency of the aforementioned - 2025 (O&M) 01.04.2025 ...Petitioner ...Respondent The instant petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section for quashing of order dated Judicial arising , registered under Section 25 of the Arms whereby the tition has been filed by the petitioner on the grounds and it has been argued by his counsel that the petitioner has been Initially, he was found innocent passed by the learned been summoned as an additional accused on allowing However, the petitioner had left India for Canada on 17.06.2024 i.e. much prior to passing of aforesaid was not aware about pendency of the aforementioned MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.02 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-17570 trial against him as he any notice/warrants issued by the petitioner had been declared a pro procedure prescribed under Section 82 proceedings. aside. 3. that the petitioner was having knowledge about the pendency of the trial and had intentionally avoided his appearance before the learned trial Court. Therefore, he urged that the peti 4. and have also gone through the material placed on record. 5. 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 person, I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated 04.03.2025 all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 6. copies of zim 20.01.2025 received back unserved, proclamation against 17570-2025 (O&M) trial against him as he was never served at his ordinary place of residence any notice/warrants issued by the learned petitioner had been declared a proclaimed procedure prescribed under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. proceedings. Hence, it is urged that the Learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punja that the petitioner was having knowledge about the pendency of the trial and had intentionally avoided his appearance before the learned trial Court. Therefore, he had been rightly declared a proclaimed urged that the petition is liable to be dismissed. 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 04.03.2025 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 20.01.2025, since the non-bailable warrants issued against the petitioner were received back unserved, the learned trial Court had ordered for issuance of proclamation against him for 28.02.2025. -2- at his ordinary place of residence with learned trial Court. Even otherwise, claimed person without following the proper Cr.P.C. He is ready to join the Court Hence, it is urged that the impugned order is liable to be set Learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has argued that the petitioner was having knowledge about the pendency of the trial and had intentionally avoided his appearance before the learned trial Court. rightly declared a proclaimed person. Hence, it is tion is liable to be dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length 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 till the date of declaring him a proclaimed , I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated suffers from material illegalities and is liable to be quashed with all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 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 this order shows - with Even otherwise, the following the proper He is ready to join the Court impugned order is liable to be set b has argued that the petitioner was having knowledge about the pendency of the trial and had intentionally avoided his appearance before the learned trial Court. . Hence, it is at considerable length 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 till the date of declaring him a proclaimed , I am of the considered opinion that the impugned order dated suffers from material 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 A bare perusal of this order shows MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.02 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-17570 that the learned trial Court before ordering for publication of proclamation has not recorded its proper satisfaction that was concealing himself so that the warrant of arrest, previously issued, cannot be executed, despite reasonable diligence, which was in violation of the provisions of Section 82(1) of Cr.P.C. Reliance upon Rohit Kumar Vs. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl. J. 7. learned trial Court, had gone abroad by the Court concerned to know about the address of the petitioner in abroad, where the process could be sent to him. No letter to Ministry of External Affairs qua service of notice/warrants/proclamation against the petitioner shown to have been written by the trial Court. As such, it can reasonably be presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, he had no occasion to conceal himself. As such, the action of the trial Court by switching to the proclamation 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) 8663 8. view of the ratio of law as laid down in above cited authorities petition is allowed and the impugned order dated passed by the titled as State registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City 2 17570-2025 (O&M) that the learned trial Court before ordering for publication of proclamation has not recorded its proper satisfaction that that the petition was concealing himself so that the warrant of arrest, previously issued, cannot be executed, despite reasonable diligence, which was in violation of the provisions of Section 82(1) of Cr.P.C. Reliance ohit Kumar Vs. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl. J. Further, a perusal of order dated learned trial Court, reveals that it was in the knowledge of it had gone abroad six months back. However, no by the Court concerned to know about the address of the petitioner in abroad, where the process could be sent to him. No letter to Ministry of External Affairs qua service of notice/warrants/proclamation against the petitioner shown to have been written by the trial Court. As such, it can reasonably be presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, he had no occasion to conceal himself. As such, the action of the trial Court by switching to the proclamation proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be placed Manjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab : 2013 SCC Online (P&H) 8663 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 State vs. Jasdev Singh, arising out of FIR No. 94 dated 24.07.2019, registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City 2 -3- that the learned trial Court before ordering for publication of proclamation has that the petitioner had absconded or was concealing himself so that the warrant of arrest, previously issued, cannot be executed, despite reasonable diligence, which was in violation of the provisions of Section 82(1) of Cr.P.C. Reliance in this regard can be placed ohit Kumar Vs. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl. J. 2561. perusal of order dated 08.11.2024, passed by the in the knowledge of it that the petitioner . However, no efforts whatsoever were made by the Court concerned to know about the address of the petitioner in abroad, where the process could be sent to him. No letter to Ministry of External Affairs qua service of notice/warrants/proclamation against the petitioner shown to have been written by the trial Court. As such, it can reasonably be presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, he had no occasion to conceal himself. As such, the action of the trial Court by proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be placed Manjit Kaur vs. State of Punjab : 2013 SCC Online (P&H) 8663. 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 04.03.2025 (Annexure P Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mansa in case , arising out of FIR No. 94 dated 24.07.2019, registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City 2 - that the learned trial Court before ordering for publication of proclamation has er had absconded or was concealing himself so that the warrant of arrest, previously issued, cannot be executed, despite reasonable diligence, which was in violation of the in this regard can be placed 08.11.2024, passed by the that the petitioner efforts whatsoever were made by the Court concerned to know about the address of the petitioner in abroad, where the process could be sent to him. No letter to Ministry of External Affairs qua service of notice/warrants/proclamation against the petitioner is shown to have been written by the trial Court. As such, it can reasonably be presumed that the process never reached the petitioner and hence, he had no occasion to conceal himself. As such, the action of the trial Court by proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. can itself be stated to be bad in the eyes of law. Reliance in this context can be placed also in , the present 04.03.2025 (Annexure P-5), case , arising out of FIR No. 94 dated 24.07.2019, registered under Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station City 2 MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.02 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-17570 Mansa, District Mansa, person, is quashed with all consequential 9. 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 weeks from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to its satisfaction. 10. Court, his arrest 11. the learned to be dismissed. 12. Rs. 10,000/ Authority, Mansa. 01.04.2025 Waseem Ansari Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 17570-2025 (O&M) Mansa, District Mansa, whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed , is 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 weeks from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to its satisfaction. Till the appearance of the petitioner before the Court, his arrest shall remain stayed. It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before learned trial Court within the stipulated time to be dismissed. However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/-, to be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services Authority, Mansa. 01.04.2025 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable -4- whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed 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 weeks from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release him on bail, subject to his furnishing personal/surety bonds to its satisfaction. Till the appearance of the petitioner before the learned It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before the stipulated time, this petition shall be deemed However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of , to be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services (MANISHA BATRA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No - whereby the petitioner had been declared a proclaimed 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 06 weeks from today and on doing so, the learned trial Court shall release him on learned trial It is made clear that in case the petitioner fails to appear before , this petition shall be deemed However, this relief shall be subject to payment of cost of , to be deposited by the petitioner with the District Legal Services MOHAMMAD WASEEM ANSARI 2025.04.02 17:30 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document