TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 1289
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r Sections 120-B, 406 and 420 of the IPC in Police Station Karnal Civil Lines, District Karnal whereby the petitioners were declared proclaimed persons under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C.. Briefly stated the facts relevant for disposal of present petition are that FIR No.154 dated 21.02.2019 was registered under Sections 120-B, 406 and 420 of the IPC in Police Station Karnal Civil Lines, District Karnal against the petitioners on written complaint made by Ram Kumar on the allegations that the petitioners cheated the complainant by making fraudulent representation of providing 2 BHK flat and dishonestly induced him to pay amount of Rs. 9,04,429/- but the petitioners neither gave the flat nor returned the money. The petitioners failed to appear before the Court despite publication of proclamation and were declared proclaimed persons vide order dated 05.10.2019 on the basis of which above-said FIR under Section 174-A of the IPC was registered against the petitioners. Feeling aggrieved from the above-said order the petitioners have filed the present petition for quashing thereof along with consequential proceedings. Notice of motion restricted to respondent No.1 only. Pursuant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village; (c) a copy thereof shall be affixed to some conspicuous part of the Court-house; (ii) the Court may also, if it thinks fit, direct a copy of the proclamation to be published in a daily newspaper circulating in the place in which such person ordinarily resides. (3) A statement in writing by the Court issuing the proclamation to the effect that the proclamation was duly published on a specified day, in the manner specified in clause (i) of sub-section (2), shall be conclusive evidence that the requirements of this section have been complied with, and that the proclamation was published on such day. (4) Where a proclamation published under sub-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, 402, 436, 449, 459 or 460 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), and 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 ef....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....anner laid down in Section 82 (2) of the Cr.P.C.. For publication the proclamation has to be first publicly read in some conspicuous place of the town or village in which the accused ordinarily resides; then the same has to be affixed to some conspicuous part of the house or homestead in which the accused ordinarily resides or to some conspicuous place of such town or village and thereafter a copy of the proclamation has to be affixed to some conspicuous part of the Court-house. The three sub-clauses (a)- (c) in Section 82 (2)(i) of the Cr.P.C. are conjunctive and not disjunctive, which means that there would be no valid publication of the proclamation unless all the three modes of publication are proved. (See Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs. The State of W.B. : 1973 CriLJ 1368). Where the Court so orders a copy of the proclamation has to be additionally published in a daily newspaper circulating in the place in which the accused ordinarily resides. Advisably, proclamation has to be issued with four copies so that one each of the three copies of the proclamation may be affixed to some conspicuous part of the house or homestead in which the accused ordinarily resides, to some conspicuous place....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s regard may be made to Birad Dan Vs. State : 1958 CriLJ 965 and Rohit Kumar Vs. State of Delhi : 2008 Crl. J. 2561. Further, SI Dharampal who published the proclamation merely affixed one copy of the proclamation at common place and one copy of the same at notice board of the Court and did not publicly read out the same in some conspicuous place of the town/village where the petitioners ordinarily resided before absconding. Therefore, proclamation was not published as per mandatory requirements of Section 82(2)(a) of the Cr.P.C. Reliance in this regard may be placed on Emperor Vs. Subbarayar : (1895) 19 Mad 3 and Pawan Kumar Gupta Vs. The State of W.B. : 1973 CriLJ 1368. Furthermore, in the present case vide order dated 02.08.2019 proclamation was ordered to be published against the petitioners under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. requiring the petitioners to appear before the Court on 04.09.2019. The proclamation was published by SI Dharampal on 04.09.2019 and the petitioners did not get statutory minimum period of thirty days for their appearance before the Court on 04.09.2019. Vide order dated 04.09.2019 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal adjourned the case to 05.10.201....