Point of Law: The expression ‘reason to believe’ means sufficient cause to believe. As also enunciated in Section 26 IPC, a person is said to have ‘reason to believe’ a thing, if he has sufficient cause to believe that thing but not otherwise. Thus, ‘reason to believe’ that a person against whom warrant has been issued is either absconding or concealing himself should be reflected by the material placed on record for the Court. The use of expression ‘so that such warrant cannot be executed’ further implies that the person must be attributed with the knowledge that such warrants have been issued against him and his abscondence or concealment is intentional.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J.

1. The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the order dated 14.08.2018 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-04, NI Act, South District, Saket Courts, New Delhi vide which the petitioner was declared an absconder. Additionally, the petitioner has also sought quashing of FIR No. 338/2018 and FIR No. 231/2019 both registered under Section 174A IPC at Police Station Hauz Khas, New Delhi. He also seeks setting aside of the order dated 15.02.2020, vide which his properties have been directed to be attached, and stay of the proceedings pending in FIR No. 338/2018 and FIR No. 231/2019.

2. The present case arises out of a complaint filed by respondent No. 2 under Section 138 N.I. Act read with Sections 141 and 142 N.I. Act and Section 420 IPC being Complaint Case No. 8416/2017 against the petitioner and others. On noting that the petitioner was stated to be an Authorized Signatory of the cheque in question and a Director in the accused Company, namely ABC Aviation & Training Services (P) Ltd., cognizance was taken by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate against the accused under Section 138 N.I. Act read with Section 141 N.I. Act and summons were issued.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the order declaring the petitioner as an ‘Absconder’ as well as consequent registration of the aforementioned FIRs by raising the following contentions:

(i) the proceedings conducted by the concerned Court while declaring the petitioner an ‘Absconder’ show complete non-application of mind;

(ii) the proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were conducted while showing the petitioner to be a resident of Kerala, whereas he was residing in Karnataka; the correct address of the petitioner (i.e., of Karnataka) was placed on record by the complainant himself;

(iii) the procedure prescribed under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was given complete go-bye; and

(iv) two FIRs on the same cause of action could not have been registered.

4. It is also submitted that on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner undertakes to regularly appear before the Trial Court. Per Contra, learned APP for the State, duly assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has opposed the prayers. It is submitted that the petitioner was declared Absconder after following due process of law.

5. I have heard learned counsels for the parties as well as gone through the Trial Court Record. Before proceeding further, I deem it apposite to refer to Section 82 Cr.P.C., which reads as under:

“82. Proclamation for person absconding.-(1) If any Court has reason to believe (whether after taking evidence or not) that any person against whom a warrant has been issued by it has absconded or is concealing himself so that such warrant cannot be executed, such Court may publish a written proclamation requiring him to appear at a specified place and at a specified time not less than thirty days from the date of publishing such proclamation.

(2) The proclamation shall be published as follows:—

(i) (a) it shall be publicly read in some conspicuous place of the town or village in which such person ordinarily resides;

(b) it shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the house or homestead in which such person ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village;

(c) a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the Court House;

(ii) the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the proclamation to be published in a daily newspaper circulating in the place in which such person ordinarily resides.

(3) A statement in writing by the Court issuing the proclamation to the effect that the proclamation was duly published on a specified day, in the manner specified in clause (i) of sub-section (2), shall be conclusive evidence that the requirements of this section have been complied with, and that the proclamation was published on such day.

1[(4) Where a proclamation published under sub-section (1) is