The legal point established is that a person can be declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 Cr.P.C. for offences not specifically mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C., and the consequences of such declaration are similar to those of a proclaimed offender for the purposes of all liabilities.

JUDGMENT

Jasjit Singh Bedi, J. - The prayer in the present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is for quashing of the order dated 15.02.2022 (Annexure P-7) declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed offender in complaint case No.1 of 2018 dated 20.11.2018 titled as Directorate of Enforcement Versus Athar Sayeed and others registered under Section 45 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, pending before the learned Special Judge, Jalandhar (designated under The Prevention of Money Laundering Act).

2. The brief facts of the case are that the State Special Operation Cell (SSOC), Amritsar recovered Indian currency of Rs.17,00,000/- and 500 gram heroin from one Athar Sayeed and registered an FIR No.02 dated 27.03.2016 under Sections 27, 29, 61, 85 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. A charge-sheet has been filed in the FIR by the SSOC on 30.07.2016. On the basis of said FIR, the Directorate of Enforcement, Jalandhar Zonal Office recorded a case No.ECR/02/JLZO/ 2016 on 31.03.2016 as Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 are scheduled offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. The investigation revealed that the amount of Rs.17,00,000/- seized by the Police from the possession of Athar Sayeed pertained to illegal drug related transactions. Investigation also revealed that Athar Sayeed was indulging in drug trafficking in Punjab following the directions of Shahid Malik @ Shahid Chuha (the petitioner) for payment, whereas Sukhchain Singh indulged in smuggling of heroin and also had made payments of money generated from drug smuggling to Athar Sayeed on the instruction of one Lala, a smuggler. Investigations also revealed that Athar Sayeed used to traffic in drugs on the instructions of Shahid Malik @ Shahid Chuha and also used to hand over all payments received from drug smuggling to Shahid Malik @ Shahid Chuha. Thus, Rs.17,00,000/- seized from the possession of Athar Sayeed son of Ahmad Sayeed was found to be generated through illegal drug trafficking activities and represents the proceeds of crime. Prosecution complaint under Section 45 of PMLA, Act 2002 against Athar Sayeed, Shahid Malik @ Shahid Chuha and Sukhchain Singh was filed before the Hon'ble Court on 20.11.2018.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner could not said to be an absconder as after the dismissal of his application on 18.05.2020 (Annexure P-2), he had filed an anticipatory bail before this Court, which was pending consideration. As there was no interim protection therefore, the petitioner was unable to join proceedings before the learned Special Court, Jalandhar apprehending his arrest.

4. He contends that the proper procedure as envisaged under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was not followed while declaring the petitioner a proclaimed offender. He refers to the orders Annexures P3 to P-7 to contend that one month's clear notice for appearance after execution of proclamation had not been provided to him and mere adjournment of the case would not amount to proper compliance of Section 82 Cr.P.C. He, therefore, contends that the impugned order dated 15.02.2022 (Annexure P-7) is liable to be set aside. Reliance is placed on the judgments of this Court in Ruby Begam & another Versus State of Haryana passed in CRM-M-47042-2017, decided on 30.05.2018 and Avtar Singh Versus State of Punjab, passed in CRM-M- 14677-2020, decided on 11.06.2020 He further contends that the petitioner could not have been declared a proclaimed offender because as per Section 82(4) Cr.P.C. only those offences that were mentioned in the said sub-section entailed declaration of the accused a proclaimed offender. For offences other than those mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C. no order declaring the person a proclaimed offender could be passed. He therefore, contends that the impugned order dated 15.02.2022 (Annexure P-7) is liable to be set aside on this count as well. Reference has been made to the