104 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision:24.03.2026 Ankit …Petitioner Vs.

State of Haryana …Respondent Coram : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.S.Shekhawat Present: Mr. P.S Ahluwalia, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Bhavi Kapoor, Advocate Mr. Dev Kumar Ahlamat, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Parmod Kumar, AAG, Haryana.

***

N.S.Shekhawat J.

1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C with a prayer to set aside the impugned order dated 04.10.2022 (Annexure P-2) passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar, whereby the petitioner was declared as a proclaimed offender in a case arising out of FIR No. 252, dated 03.09.2012, under Sections 364,302,201,216,218 r/w Section 34 of IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, registered at Police Station Beri, Jhajjar (Annexure P-1).

2. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was falsely involved in abovementioned case, which was registered on the basis of the complaint moved by Narender, complainant. He further submits that after being declared as proclaimed offender, another FIR No.42 dated 22.02.2023, under Section 174-A of IPC, Police Station Beri, District Jhajjar was also ordered to be registered against the petitioner.

3. Learned senior counsel further argues that in the present case, the petitioner was earlier granted bail and was regularly appearing before the Trial Court for almost five years. However, some other criminal case was also ordered to be registered against him and his bail was cancelled, due to his non- appearance. Ultimately, vide order dated 09.08.2022 (Annexure P-5), the Trial Court issued the proclamation process against the petitioner under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C and the proclamation report was awaited for 19.09.2022. It was ordered that the Executing Officer shall also appear before the Court on the date fixed along with the proclamation report. On the next date i.e.19.09.2022, the Court recorded the statement of ASI Bhupesh i.e. the Executing Official and as per the report on the proclamation and statement of Executing official, the proclamation was published on 19.08.2022. Consequently, the mandatory period of 30 days had not expired on 19.09.2022 and the case was adjourned to 04.10.2022 for the presence of the present petitioner under Section 82/83 Cr.P.C. Learned senior counsel further submits that the order (Annexure P-6) dated 19.09.2022 as well as the impugned order dated 04.10.2022 (Annexure P-2) were not in consonance with the mandatory provisions of the Section 82 of Cr.P.C. In fact, the Court was required to give a period of not less than 30 days from the date of publication of proclamation to the date fixed before the Trial Court requiring the presence of the accused under Section 82(1) Cr.P.C. In the present case, the period of 30 days had not expired on 19.09.2022 and the Trial Court instead of issuing a fresh proclamation, simply opted to adjourn the matter for securing the presence of the petitioner. Thus, the impugned order dated 04.10.2022 (Annexure P-2) and all other consequential proceedings arising therefrom liable to be quashed by this Court.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had intentionally not appeared before the Trial Court for several months and is not entitled for any relief. It was submitted that the petitioner had the knowledge of pendency of the proceedings against him, however, he chose not to appear before the Trial Court and the petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 which provides for publication of proclamation against person absconding, reads as under:-

“82. Proclamation for person absconding. --

(1) If any Court has reason to believe (whether after taking evidence or not) that any person against whom a warrant has been issued by it has absconded or is concealing himself so that such