Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harnazar Singh vs State Of Punjab And Another on 11 March, 2026
CRM-M-12759--2026 (O&M) -1-
163
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
-.-
CRM
CRM-M-12759-2026 (O&M)
Date of Decision : 11.03.2026
Harnazar Singh ....Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab and Another ....Respondents
CORAM : HON'BLE MS.
MS JUSTICE MANDEEP PANNU
Present: Mr. Randeep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. H.S.Wadhwa, DAG Punjab.
-.-
MANDEEP PANNU J. (Oral)
1. Present petition has been filed under Section 528 BNSS for quashing of order dated 16.09.2010 vide which the petitioner has been wrongly and erroneously declared as proclaimed offender without complying with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C (84 BNSS).
2. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has gone abroad and complaint was registered in his absence, the learned trial Court issued proclamation against the petitioner. Finally, the petitioner was declared as proclaimed proclaim offender vide order dated 16.09.2010.. He further submits that the order declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender is in violation of the provisions of Section 82 of Cr.P.C. He has submitted that neither the proper publication nor the petitioner was served through Indian Embassy Abroad. He has thus submitted that the impugned order being unsustainable in the eyes of law, deserves to be set aside. He has submitted that the petitioner be granted protection for appearing before the trial Court.
TRIPTI SAINI2026.03.14 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document
CRM-M-12759--2026 (O&M) -2-
3. Learned State counsel has opposed the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has submitted that the ppetitioner etitioner has rightly declared as proclaimed person, who remained absent from the Court without any valid reason.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record record.
5. In the present case, the main contention raised on behalf of the petitioner involve interpretation of provisions of Section 82 of the Cr.P.C and same is reproduced as below:-
below:
[4. Where a proclamation published under Sub Sub-Section Section (1) is in respect of a person accused of an offence punishable under section 302 304, 364, 367, 382, 392, 393,, 394, 395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 302, 400 402 436, 449, 459 or 460 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) and 402, such person fails to appear at the specified place and time required by the proclamation, the Court may, after making such inquiry as it thinks fit, pronounce him a proclaimed offender and make a declaration to that effect.
5. The provisions of Sub-Sections Sections (2) and (3) shall apply to a declaration made by the Court under Sub Sub-Section Section (4) as they apply to the proclamation published under Sub Sub-Section(1)]"
6. Finally, it has been argued that the petitioner has been wrongly declared to be a proclaimed proclaimed offender in the present case. As per Section 82(4) Cr.P.C where a proclamation published under Sub Section 1 is in respect of a person/accused of an offence punishable under Sections 302, 304, 364, 367, 382, 382 392, 393, 394, 395, 395 396, 397, 398, 399, 400, 402 402, 436, 449, 459 or 460 of the IPC and such person fails to appear at at a specified place and time required by the proclamation, the Court may after making such enquiry as it thinks fit pronounce him a proclaimed offender and make a declaration to that effect. In the present TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.14 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12759--2026 (O&M) -3-
case, the present petitioner was being prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 463, 466, 467 IPC and said offences do not find mention in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C.
7. This Court finds sufficient force in the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner in this regard. It has been he held by this Court in CRM--M-
34328-2011 2011 (O&M) titled as "Rahul Dutta Vs. State of Haryana" as follows:--
" Till the amendment by Act No.25 of 2005, proclamation was being done in respect of a person against whom a warrant has been issued and who has been either absconding or concealing himself to evade the execution of warrants but by way of Act No.25 of 2005, in consonance with Section 40(2)(ii), sub sub-section section (4) is made a part of Section 82 Cr.P.C.
The offences mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C. are of recurring ecurring nature. All the persons, who are absconding or concealing themselves to evade execution of warrants of arrest, could be proclaimed persons but they could be declared a "proclaimed offender" only under the provisions of the IPC which are mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C. There is stark distinction between a proclaimed person and a proclaimed offender and for that reason, there is a difference of punishment provided under Section 174 174-A A IPC as it provides imprisonment which may extend upto three year yearss or with fine or with both regarding a person who has been proclaimed in terms of Section 82(1) Cr.P.C. and the imprisonment which may extend upto seven years and also with fine in respect of a person who is declared a "proclaimed offender" under Section 82(4) Cr.P.C.
I have also minutely examined those sections of IPC mentioned in Section 40(2)(ii) Cr.P.C. and have found that Sections 435, 450 and 457 IPC are not mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C., whereas Section 364, 367, 400 and 459 IPC are additiona additionally lly mentioned therein.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also argued that Sections 83 to 86 Cr.P.C. deal with the proclaimed person and provide a complete TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.14 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12759--2026 (O&M) -4- procedure with regard to the attachment of his property but it does not deal with a person who has has been declared to be a "proclaimed offender.
Thus, in view of the aforesaid discussion, I am of the considered opinion that the terms "proclaimed person" and "proclaimed offender" have different connotations. A person who is evading the execution of warrants warrants of arrest issued under the particular Sections of the IPC which are mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C., can only be declared to be a proclaimed offender and the persons under the other provisions of the IPC and the laws, can be declared to be a proclaimed person in terms of Section 82(1) Cr.P.C."
proclaimed
8. In view of the above discussion and the law laid down by this Court in the matter of Rahul Dutta (supra) the petitioner has been wrongly declared to be a 'proclaimed offender' in the present case.
9. It is apparent from the record that the petitioner along with three other persons has been named in the criminal complaint No.184/1994. However, the petitioner remained absent as he was never served with any notice of proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C and thereafter he was declared as proclaimed offender.
offender As submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner tthat hat the petitioner is in abroad when he was declared as proclaimed offender, without commenting anything about the authenticity of the ground of absence absence taken by the petitioner, this Court proceed to decide the matter as now the petitioner is ready and keen to join the proceedings.
10. Considering the totality of circumstances, this Court is of the view that the petitioner can be directed to appear before the trial Court, so that trial may resume. Accordingly, plea of the petitioner is accepted. Impugned order dated 16.09.2010 is set aside to the extent of declaring the petitioner as 'proclaimed TRIPTI SAINI 2026.03.14 12:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-12759--2026 (O&M) -5- offender' and he is directed to be released on bail, iin n the eventuality of surrender by him before the trial Court/Duty Magistrate concerned within a period of one week from today, subject to payment of Rs.10,000/ Rs.10,000/- as costs to be deposited with the Poor Patients Welfare Fund, PGIMER, Chandigarh.
11. The petitioner shall also furnish bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Duty Magistrate. Besides, petitioner will also submit an undertaking/affidavit that he will keep appearing during the proceedings of the trial in future and the proceedings proceedings will not be delayed because of his conduct.
12. It is made clear that in case, petitioner fails to appear before the trial Court/Duty Magistrate within a stipulated period, this order shall be deemed to be vacated.
13. With aforementioned terms, terms, present petition stands disposed of.
14. All pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands disposed of.
March 11, 2026 (MANDEEP PANNU)
tripti JUDGE
Whether speaking/non-speaking
speaking/non speaking : Speaking
Whether reportable : Yes/No
TRIPTI SAINI
2026.03.14 12:09
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document