Mandatory thirty-day proclamation notice under CrPC invalidates attachment and sale proceedings when statutory compliance is not met.

A proclamation issued without compliance with the mandatory thirty days' notice under Section 87 CrPC was treated as invalid in law. Because attachment under Section 88 could arise only from a valid proclamation, the resulting attachment and sale proceedings were also vitiated. The High Court held that revisional powers under Section 439 were sufficient to cure the illegality and direct restoration, without invoking inherent powers under Section 561A. The petitioner was therefore entitled to restoration of the attached immovable property and payment of the sale proceeds of the movable property.

---

---

Issues: Whether a proclamation issued without the statutory thirty days' notice under Section 87 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was invalid, and whether the resulting attachment and sale of property under Section 88 could be set aside with restoration of the attached property to the petitioner.

Analysis: The proclamation required the petitioner to appear within thirty days from the date of issue, but it was published before the expiry of that period, so the statutory condition was not complied with. The requirement of notice for not less than thirty days was treated as mandatory and imperative, and an invalid proclamation was held to be no proclamation in law. Since attachment under Section 88 could follow only a valid proclamation under Section 87, the attachment and sale proceedings were treated as vitiated. The Court also held that the revisional powers under Section 439 were sufficient to correct the illegality and direct restoration, without resort to inherent powers under Section 561A.

Conclusion: The proclamation and the consequential attachment and sale proceedings were invalid, and the petitioner was entitled to restoration of the attached immovable property and payment of the sale proceeds of the movable property.

---