Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Proclamation Order for Non-Compliance with Section 82 CrPC; Terms Declaration of Absconding “Mechanical and Illegal”
Case Name: Sukhbir Singh @ Monu v. State of Punjab
Date of Judgment: October 30, 2025
Citation: CRM-M-10043-2024
Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel
Held: The Punjab & Haryana High Court quashed the order of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Batala, declaring the petitioner a proclaimed person under Section 82 CrPC, holding that the mandatory procedure was ignored. Justice Sumeet Goel ruled that the proclamation must give a clear notice of at least 30 days from its publication, and must follow only after issuance and non-execution of warrants with recorded judicial satisfaction that the accused is absconding or concealing himself. The Court found that the Magistrate proceeded mechanically without such satisfaction and issued a proclamation granting only six days’ notice, which was contrary to law. Relying on Ashok Kumar v. State of Haryana (2013 4 RCR (Criminal) 550) and Sonu v. State of Haryana (2021 1 RCR (Criminal) 319), the Court held that non-compliance with Section 82 is fatal and renders subsequent proceedings void.
Summary: The petitioner challenged the order dated 10 March 2012 declaring him a proclaimed person in connection with FIR No. 164 of 2006 registered under Sections 326, 452, 323, 427, 506, 148, 149 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Shri Hargobindpur, District Batala. It was argued that the proclamation was executed on 27 December 2011 for appearance on 2 January 2012 — a gap of only six days — and that no fresh proclamation was issued thereafter. The High Court observed that the Magistrate had not first ensured execution of arrest warrants, nor recorded satisfaction that the accused was evading arrest, thus vitiating the entire process. The Bench reiterated that Section 82 is mandatory and cannot be invoked casually; its conditions must be scrupulously followed to avoid serious prejudice to the accused. Citing Dilbagh Singh v. State of Punjab (2015 8 RCR (Criminal) 166) and Devender Singh Negi v. State of U.P. (1994 Cri LJ 1783), the Court found the impugned order illegal and contrary to law.
Decision: The High Court allowed the petition and quashed the order dated 10 March 2012 declaring the petitioner a proclaimed person, along with all consequential proceedings arising from FIR No. 164 of 2006. Observing that the petitioner had already joined the investigation and cooperated, Justice Goel held that continuing the criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Pending applications were disposed of accordingly.