148 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS KAKA ALIAS RAMESH KUMAR STATE OF PUNJAB CORAM: HON’BLE MR. Present: Mr. for the petitioner. HARPREET SINGH BRAR 1. This is the first petition filed under Section 528 Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) 03.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions P-4), whereby the petitioner was decla stemming from FIR No.09 dated 27.01.2017 registered under Sections 399/402 of IPC and 25/54/59 of Arms Act Kapurthala. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that granted by this Court on 17.02.2025 in case bearing titled as Rajesh Kumar alias Kaka alias Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Punjab petitioner could not surrender before 04.03.2025 as he could not arrange the surety, however, he has paid all the cost record as Annexure P 03.03.2025, declared the petitioner as proclaimed offender. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner proclamation was IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS KAKA ALIAS RAMESH KUMAR V/S PUNJAB HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Mr. Manoj R. Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. **** HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (ORAL) This is the first petition filed under Section 528 Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 seeking quashing of impugned order dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions ), whereby the petitioner was declared as proclaimed stemming from FIR No.09 dated 27.01.2017 registered under Sections 399/402 and 25/54/59 of Arms Act at Police Station Subhanpur, District Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that s Court on 17.02.2025 in case bearing Rajesh Kumar alias Kaka alias Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Punjab petitioner could not surrender before 04.03.2025 as he could not arrange the surety, however, he has paid all the cost and the receipt thereof is available on record as Annexure P-3. Due to which, the trial Court vide order dated , declared the petitioner as proclaimed offender. Learned counsel for the petitioner proclamation was issued against the petitioner IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-19668-2025 Date of decision: 09.04.2025 RAJESH KUMAR ALIAS KAKA ALIAS RAMESH KUMAR ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENT HARPREET SINGH BRAR This is the first petition filed under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik , 2023 seeking quashing of impugned order dated 03.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala (Annexure red as proclaimed offender in case stemming from FIR No.09 dated 27.01.2017 registered under Sections 399/402 at Police Station Subhanpur, District Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the relief s Court on 17.02.2025 in case bearing CRM-M No.9035 of 2025 Rajesh Kumar alias Kaka alias Ramesh Kumar vs. State of Punjab, the petitioner could not surrender before 04.03.2025 as he could not arrange the and the receipt thereof is available on to which, the trial Court vide order dated , declared the petitioner as proclaimed offender. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that without following the drill of MANISHA 2025.04.09 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-19668 Section 82 Cr.P.C. and non the entire proceedings served and the impugned order is liable 4. Notice of motion. 5. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent passed by the learned trial Court by contending that the petitioner did not in appearance before the trial Court intentionally and deliberately and, therefore, having left with no other option, proclamation was issued to secure his presence. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the record of the case w disposal. 7. While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the proce a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be and not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. 8. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial Court issued proclamation without recording reasons of its belief that the petitioner has absconded or is concealing Major Singh @ Major Vs. State of Punjab 2023 (3) RCR (Criminal) 406; 2023 (2) Law Herald 1506 19668-2025 2 Section 82 Cr.P.C. and non-compliance of the mandatory provisions vitiates the entire proceedings, which suffers from incurable illegality served and the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Notice of motion. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent passed by the learned trial Court by contending that the petitioner did not in appearance before the trial Court intentionally and deliberately and, therefore, having left with no other option, proclamation was issued to secure I have heard learned counsel for the record of the case with their able assistance, the matter is taken up for final While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance that the same is done in line with the procedure established by law to maintain a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be and not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial Court issued proclamation without recording reasons of its belief that the petitioner has absconded or is concealing himself. This Court in the judgment passed in Major Singh @ Major Vs. State of Punjab 2023 (3) RCR (Criminal) 406; 2023 (2) Law Herald 1506 has held that the Court is first required to record its compliance of the mandatory provisions vitiates which suffers from incurable illegality as he was never to be set aside. Mr. Subhash Godara, Addl. A.G., Punjab, who is present in the Court, accepts notice on behalf of respondent-State and supports the order passed by the learned trial Court by contending that the petitioner did not put in appearance before the trial Court intentionally and deliberately and, therefore, having left with no other option, proclamation was issued to secure I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the able assistance, the matter is taken up for final While the scheme of criminal justice system necessitates curtailment of personal liberty to some extent, it is of the utmost importance dure established by law to maintain a healthy balance between personal liberty of the individual-accused and interests of the society in promoting law and order. Such procedure must be compatible with Article 21 of the Constitution of India i.e. it must be fair, just and not suffer from the vice of arbitrariness or unreasonableness. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the trial Court issued proclamation without recording reasons of its belief that the petitioner has . This Court in the judgment passed in Major Singh @ Major Vs. State of Punjab 2023 (3) RCR (Criminal) 406; has held that the Court is first required to record its MANISHA 2025.04.09 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-19668 satisfaction before issuance of process under Section 82 of recording of the satisfaction itself makes such order suffering from incurable illegality. In the judgment passed by this Court in 2021 (1) RCR (Crl.) 319 Section 82 (2) Cr.P.C. for the publication of a proclamation against an absconder are mandatory. Any non an ‘irregularity’ and renders the proclamation and proceedings subsequent thereto a nullity. 9. The sole purpose of issuance of non of proclamation is to secure presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner in the present case has 10. In view of the aforesaid facts and ci the ratio of law laid down in petition is allowed 4), vide which, quashed. 11. The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court within a period of two weeks from today and on bail on his furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court, alon Pingalwara Charitable Society, Makdoompura, in addition to the cost imposed earlier, for wasting precious time 12. Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial Court and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. 19668-2025 3 satisfaction before issuance of process under Section 82 of recording of the satisfaction itself makes such order suffering from incurable illegality. In the judgment passed by this Court in 2021 (1) RCR (Crl.) 319, it has been held that the con (2) Cr.P.C. for the publication of a proclamation against an absconder are mandatory. Any non-compliance therewith cannot be cured as an ‘irregularity’ and renders the proclamation and proceedings subsequent y. The sole purpose of issuance of non of proclamation is to secure presence of the accused before the trial Court. The petitioner in the present case has himself come forward. In view of the aforesaid facts and ci the ratio of law laid down in Major Singh @ Major petition is allowed and the impugned order dated , the petitioner was declared The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court within a weeks from today and on his doing so, furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the Court, along with costs of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited with Pingalwara Charitable Society, Makdoompura, in addition to the cost imposed for wasting precious time of the Court. Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial ourt and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. satisfaction before issuance of process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and non- recording of the satisfaction itself makes such order suffering from incurable illegality. In the judgment passed by this Court in Sonu Vs. State of Haryana , it has been held that the conditions specified in (2) Cr.P.C. for the publication of a proclamation against an compliance therewith cannot be cured as an ‘irregularity’ and renders the proclamation and proceedings subsequent The sole purpose of issuance of non-bailable warrants or issuance of proclamation is to secure presence of the accused before the trial Court. The come forward. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances and in view of Major Singh @ Major (supra), the present dated 03.03.2025 (Annexure P- as proclaimed offender is The petitioner is directed to appear before the trial Court within a doing so, he shall be admitted to furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the to be deposited with All India Pingalwara Charitable Society, Makdoompura, in addition to the cost imposed Receipt of payment of cost must be presented before learned trial ourt and learned trial Court is directed to verify the same. MANISHA 2025.04.09 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment CRM-M-19668 13. It is made clear that in case, the petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this Court shall be deemed to be vacated. April 09, 2025 manisha (i) (ii) 19668-2025 4 It is made clear that in case, the petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this Court shall be deemed to be vacated. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable It is made clear that in case, the petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court within a stipulated period, the interim protection granted by this HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No MANISHA 2025.04.09 17:49 I attest to the accuracy and authenticiy of this order/judgment