IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT (cid:1)

CHANDIGARH

120 CRM-M No.6834 of 2025 Date of Decision:06.02.2025 (cid:1)

Talwinder Singh ... Petitioner (cid:1)

Versus State of Punjab ... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAMIT KUMAR Present: Mr. K artik Patial, Advocate for the petitioner.

***

(cid:1)

NAMIT KUMAR, J. (ORAL)

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of impugned order dated 29.09.2006 (Annexure P-1) passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dasuya in the case titled as State Vs. Talwinder Singh whereby he has been declared as proclaimed offender in FIR No.310 dated 30.11.2005 registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC at Police Station Tanda, Hoshiarpur and further directions have been issued to attach property of the petitioner under Section 83 Cr.P.C.

2. Although the petitioner was declared proclaimed offender on 29.09.2006; however, in the year 2022, he filed a bail application before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Hoshiarpur under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail. The said application was dismissed by the said Court vide order dated 09.05.2022 by recording the following findings:-

“5. After giving my careful and thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions and on careful perusal of averments of application, contents of FIR coupled with the duly assistance rendered, the Court is of the considered view that present bail application merits dismissal. Perusal of file reveals that present case has been registered on the statement made by complainant Arjun before the police on 30.11.2005, under Sections 363, 366A IPC. In his statement, the complainant has alleged that his daughter i.e. victim aged about 14 years was illiterate. On 8.11.2005 at about 4.30 pm, she had gone out of the house for answering the call of nature, but she did not return home. He was of firm belief that his daughter has been enticed away by accused Talwinder Singh @ Sonu as he was also missing from his house. Also the record shows that present applicant/accused Talwinder Singh could not be arrested and proceedings under Section 82/83 Cr.PC were initiated against him. Despite proclamation issued by the court, accused Talwinder Singh did not appear in the court and finally, he was declared proclaimed offender in this case, vide order dated 29.9.2006, by the then Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Dasuya. In the case titled as Rajbir @ Lilu Vs. State of Haryana 2003(4) Criminal Court Cases 773 (P&H), our Hon'ble High Court has held that, "If accused is Proclaimed Offender, he has no right to apply for pre-arrest bail. It would be travesty of justice that on the one hand, accused is Proclaimed Offender, on the other hand, he is seeking his release by pre-arrest bail." In another judgment titled as Parminder Singh Garhcha Versus State of Punjab 2004(1) Criminal Court Cases 428(P&H), our Hon'ble High Court has held that, "When accused is absconding, there is no question of granting him bail." In another judgment titled as State of Madhya Pardesh Versus Pardeep Sharma 2014(2) SCC 171, similar view has been taken. Therefore, in view of all these facts and circumstances of the case in hand, this court is of the considered view that no case is made out in his favour for concession of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, this bail application deserves dismissal.

6. As a result of my above discussion, the present bail application with respect to applicant/accused Talwinder Singh being bereft of any substance, is hereby dismissed. Lower court record be returned.

File be consigned to the Record Room.”

3. Although the application seeking anticipatory bail was rejected on 09.05.2022, now the petitioner has approached this Court after a period of 2 ½ years seeking quashing of the order dated 29.09.2006 whereby he was declared as proclaimed offender, which was passed more than 18 years ago. The petitioner has been concealing himself and absconding from the process of law fo