Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur

Surendra Kumar vs State Of Raj And Anr on 15 March, 2018

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR
       S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 1321/2018

Surendra Kumar S/o Shri Balbir Singh B/c Ahir, R/o Village
Tatarpur Khalsa, Ps Dharuheda, District Rewari, Hariyana.
                                                                 ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.      State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.
2.      Rajesh Kumar S/o Shri Heera Lal B/c Chamar, R/o Village
        Baghaana Tehsil Kotkasim, District Alwar.
                                                             ----Respondents
For Petitioner(s)           :   Mr. Hemant Sharma
For Respondent(s)           :   Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP for State



HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Order 15/03/2018 Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the order dated 30.7.2016 passed by the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Alwar, whereby proclamation was issued, alongwith the order dated 21.11.2016 whereby petitioner was declared as proclaimed offender, be set aside as the procedure prescribed under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was not valid.

To cut the long story short, it will be pertinent to reproduce the orders dated 30.7.2016 and 21.11.2016, as under:-

Þ30-07-2016 Spe. PP mi-A eqy- vuq- rkehy ugha yksVh gSA izdj.k dkQh iqjkuk gSA eqyfte dh Hkfo"; esa fxjIrkjh dks dksbZ laHkkouk ugha gSA ckj&2 rkehy tkjh gks jgh gSA eqyfte dks t;sZ ,l@MCyw LvsfUMax okj.V ls ryc fd;k tkosA 82&83 dh dk;Zokgh vyx ls [kksyh tkosa lk{; eQ:jh esa xokg la[;k 4] 5] 6 t;sZ @Mcyw 1000 ls ryc gksdj fnukad 28@9@16 dks is'k gksA (2 of 2) [CRLMP-1321/2018] 21-11-16 Spe. PP mi-A eqy- eQ:j gSA lk{; eQ:jh esa PW-1 jkts'k] PW-2 cyoUr ds c;ku ys[kc) fd;sA eqyŒ ds S/W iwoZ esa tkjh gSA esVsfj;y lk{; gks pqdh gSA vc bl LVst ij i=koyh eQ:jh esa Qsly dh tkrh gSA i=koyh ds eq[; i`"B ij yky L;kgh ls uksV Mkyk tkos fd dksbZ Hkkx u"V ugha fd;k tkosa i=koyh Qsly 'kqekj gksdj ys[k eatwj gSA Þ Section 82 specifically states that the court shall ensure publication of a written proclamation and in the said proclamation, a specific place and a time shall be specified, which shall not be less than 30 days from the date of publication of such proclamation. Section 82(3) Cr.P.C. further make it mandatory for the court to record statement of the person who had published the proclamation.
In the present case, in the order dated 21.11.2016 no satisfaction has been recorded by the court that a particular Constable or official of the court had published the proclamation as per the procedure prescribed under Section 82 Cr.P.C. Therefore, until the court issuing proclamation record its satisfaction as per Section 82(3) Cr.P.C., the proclamation being contrary to the statutory provisions, is bad in the eyes of law.
Consequently, the order dated 21.11.2016 declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender is set aside.
In view of above, the present petition stands disposed of.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J Govind/