Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
SUMEET GOEL, J
Sukhbir Singh @ Monu – Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition sought to quash the proclamation order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments against the proclamation's legality were made. (Para 3) |
| 3. court emphasized adherence to section 82 cr.p.c. is mandatory. (Para 5 , 6 , 8) |
| 4. non-compliance vitiates proclamation proceedings. (Para 9) |
| 5. petition was allowed, quashing the order. (Para 11 , 12) |
SUMEET GOEL, J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., 1973, seeking quashing of order dated 10.03.2012 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Batala whereby the petitioner was declared proclaimed person in case FIR No.164 dated 09.12.2006 registered under Sections 326, 452, 323, 427, 506, 148, 149 and 120-B of IPC at Police Station Shri Hargobindpur, District Batala as also all the consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has iterated that the impugned order whereby the petitioner has been declared a proclaimed offender is wholly illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable in the eyes of law. Learned counsel has further iterated that the proclamation proceedings are vitiated as the requirement of giving mandatory notice period of 30 days as required un
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
