Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Mohd. Imran – Appellant
Versus
State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments regarding process and legality. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of section 82 cr.p.c. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. importance of proper issuance of proclamations. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 5. conclusion reversing the impugned order. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner seeking setting aside of the order dated 23.03.2010 passed by the learned ACMM (SE), New Delhi in FIR No.385/03 registered under Sections 448/380/420/468/471/506/120B IPC at P.S. Sarita Vihar, Delhi, vide which the petitioner was declared a `proclaimed offender' (hereinafter, referred to as `PO').
2. To put briefly, the present FIR was registered on the complaint of one Noor Ahmad/complainant, wherein it was stated that he was bequeathed the stated property by his father. One Atique Ahmad, i.e. brother of the complainant, was permitted by him to reside on the first floor of the property, while he himself visited the same from time and time. On one such visit, the complainant found the property occupied by the petit
Procedural safeguards in declaring a person a proclaimed offender must be strictly adhered to; otherwise, such declarations will be deemed invalid.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. must be based on sufficient cause to believe intentional abscondence or concealment, and strict adhere....
The court held that a proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. is invalid if the accused was not properly served with warrants and the court failed to record satisfaction of the accused's abscond....
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....
The court ruled that a person cannot be declared an Absconder without proper application of mind and adherence to procedural requirements set by law, particularly regarding the necessity for inquiry.
Use of the expression ‘after making such inquiry as it thinks fit’ implies that at the time of pronouncing a person as ‘proclaimed person’ or ‘proclaimed offender’, the concerned Court has to satisfy....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
