Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes Orders Declaring Petitioner a Proclaimed Person, Procedural Defect

Share:
bail sex property bail arrest lambardar IPS provisions CyberspaceMurder Evidence Auction Discipline Cross-Examination Training evidence account kidnapping Tenant wasting 68 accident land cheque land withdrawal father transfer post fir Signature railways copyright probation cheque circumstances motor murder plaint notice bail proceedings admissible justice pay evidence ndps rice Teachers bail juvenile conviction property motor bail corporation suicide probation statement electricity bail Bail drugs time person JATINDER WALIA ASJ juvenilefalse bail passport authorities sale notice suit convict fir evidence murder surety suicide bailable daughters trial suit adult license answer hall business reservation

In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Arun Monga, has quashed the orders declaring the petitioner as a proclaimed person. The court found that the petitioner had not been duly served and that the statutory requirements were not fulfilled.

The case pertained to a petition filed by M/s APG Marketings and another, seeking the quashing of an order summoning them through a proclamation under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) and another order declaring them proclaimed persons under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C.

Justice Arun Monga, in the oral judgment, stated, “Having perused the record, it is not borne out as to how the petitioners were duly served before initiating proceedings under Section 83 Cr.P.C. Such a recourse is not sustainable in law… Further, it appears that 30 days’ time, as mandated by Section 82 Cr.P.C., was not granted.”

The court acknowledged the argument put forth by the petitioner’s counsel, Mr. Rajesh Gupta, that the petitioner firm had ceased to exist prior to the pandemic due to heavy losses and that the petitioners were never served with warrants.

Based on the lack of evidence of proper service and non-compliance with the statutory requirements, the court held that the impugned orders could not be sustained. The judgment concluded by quashing the orders and directing that further proceedings continue in the lower court in accordance with the law.

Date of Decision: 03.07.2023

M/s APG Marketings and another  vs M/s Surya Polyvin Ltd. And another     

                                               

Download Judgment

Share: