Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
AMAN CHAUDHARY
Arshpreet Kaur Grewal – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMAN CHAUDHARY, J.
CRM-38529-2025
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same stands allowed. Main case is preponed and taken on board today itself.
CRM-M-47054-2025
1. Prayer made in the present petition for quashing the order dated 02.08.2025, vide which the petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender in FIR No.177 dated 29.10.2024, registered under Sections 22 , 61 and 85 of NDPS Act at Police Station South Moga, District Moga.
2. Learned counsel submits that the FIR was registered against the petitioner on 29.10.2024, Annexure P-5, which according to him is a case, wherein contraband had been planted upon her to harass and teach a lesson. Thereafter, she had approached this Court by filing anticipatory bail application, which was however, dismissed on 15.07.2025, Annexure P-14 and SLP against the same was also dismissed on 18.07.2025, Annexure P-15. Consequently, the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 02.08.2025 holding that she was deliberately concealing herself while as a matter of fact, she was availing of the remedy available to her for grant of anticipatory bail. The proclamation was effected on 02.07.2025 and from the date
The court reaffirmed that failure to follow the mandatory 30-day notice under Section 82 Cr.P.C. when declaring an absconder invalidates the proceedings, emphasizing adherence to legal processes.
The issuance of a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. requires a documented reason to believe the accused is absconding, supported by material evidence, or it is legally unsustainable.
The court established that strict adherence to the procedural requirements of Section 82 Cr.P.C. is essential for validly declaring a person as a proclaimed offender.
Proclamation proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. must adhere to strict procedural requirements, including prior issuance of arrest warrants and proper publication, to avoid nullity.
The court emphasized the mandatory requirement of a 30-day notice period under Section 82 Cr.P.C. for declaring a person as proclaimed, which was violated in this case.
The declaration of a person as proclaimed under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is invalid if the mandatory 30-day notice period is not adhered to.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the term 'may' in Section 82(4) Cr.PC provides the court with discretion to issue a fresh proclamation for a person accused of an offense, and....
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
