Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Proclamation in Cheque Bounce Case; Holds Phone Service and Mechanical Satisfaction Cannot Sustain Section 82 Proceedings

Case Name: Amrik Singh v. State of Punjab and Another
Date of Judgment: 12 December 2025
Citation: CRM-M-45694-2025
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel

Held: The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed a petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and quashed orders declaring the petitioner a proclaimed person in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court held that strict and mandatory compliance with Section 82 CrPC is a sine qua non for declaring any person proclaimed, and service “through phone”, absence of recorded satisfaction regarding absconding, and mechanical issuance of proclamation vitiate the entire proceedings.

Summary: The petition challenged orders passed by the Judicial Magistrate declaring the petitioner a proclaimed person in a cheque dishonour complaint. The petitioner contended that summons and warrants were never duly served, that the trial court had recorded service through phone, and that proclamation was issued without adherence to the mandatory statutory procedure. It was further asserted that the petitioner became aware of the proceedings only when police officials visited his shop, as he was away attending to his ailing wife.

The High Court examined the record and found that the trial court had proceeded to issue proclamation without ensuring proper execution of non-bailable warrants and without recording the foundational satisfaction that the accused had absconded or was deliberately concealing himself to evade arrest. The Court noted that service through phone is unknown to Section 82 CrPC and cannot substitute the prescribed modes of publication.

Relying on settled precedent, including Sonu v. State of Haryana, the Court reiterated that the requirements under Section 82 CrPC are mandatory and not directory. The proclamation must be preceded by due issuance of warrants, proper publication in all prescribed modes, and a reasoned satisfaction recorded by the Court. Any deviation renders the proclamation and all subsequent proceedings a nullity.

The Court further observed that proceedings under Section 82 CrPC have serious civil and criminal consequences and cannot be invoked casually or mechanically, particularly in cases arising out of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which do not fall within the category warranting declaration as a proclaimed offender.

Decision: The petition was allowed. The impugned orders declaring the petitioner a proclaimed person were set aside. All consequential proceedings arising from the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were quashed.