IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Anoop Chitkara, J
Navin Pathak alias Naveen Pathak – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
ANOOP CHITKARA, J.
FIR No. Dated Police Station Sections
94 09.10.2018 Khilchian, District 420 & 120 B IPC Amritsar
1. Challenging the order of proclamation on being declared as a proclaimed offender, the petitioner has come up before this court under section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , [ BNSS ], 2. Counsel appearing for the State has strenuously opposed this petition, including the limited relief as confined by the petitioner.
3. The petitioners' Council seeks quashing based on the non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Section 84 BNSS , 2023 (Analogous to Section 82 of CrPC, 1973). He submits that the petitioner was not served in terms of S. 84 of BNSS .
4. The petitioner wants to draw this court's attention to the fact that the absence was not willful and was due to factors beyond the petitioner’s control. The State could not dispute the factual matrix at this stage.
REASONING:
5. A proclamation was issued because they attempted to serve him at an address where he did not reside.
6. It shall be relevant to extract paragraphs 6 to 10 of the petition, which read as follows:
“6 That, subsequent to the issuing of non-bailable warrants on 09.10.2023, it has com
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.