Lamber Singh v. Amarjit Singh
! "!! ! ! # !!
! $
!" # $ % $ '()*+, "- "- - #.
/ # $ 1 $ & 2&
3 "45* 5 -5 "--! & 1
$6 &#
$ 7!3$
#8& !!
"
& 9$ $ 8
# $ 7 1 $ : #
.
;: #: & .
: $
:
:
$ $
# $ $& "7 -< "--! :
& $:
& 1
$ &
$& ; 71 :
$ $
&= < &.
"<6 () * , >$ # %& : :
#. &
7!
3$
# 8& !! :
#. :
& "- "- -
7
6
# .
&:
:
$ : !"2 2: &
:
$ 5 -5 "--! !
"--5 :
#
. # -4 "
"--5 $ "
"--5 : :
. & # $ 9$
> :
# # # # $ &
:
$ 8
$ ? &
&#$ 5 -"
"--!: $ & . ? :$ # $
8
. &"
"
"--4-+ "--! -"
-+ "--! ""
-+ "--!
<
6 #&
#
2
# $.
&
$ . # .:
$. &.:
: : :# & .
+
;
>& :
$ ?
# &
:
7! 3$
#8& !!
$ !"2 2 & .#
#. 2 #.# :& :
#
# $& $ & #:
# #
#@ #A@ A) :
: $ # :
/& .#&
,: :
: $ # # :
#
#
# $ $ &:
) :
. $ ##.1$& : ! "## $% &'( $)(* *
+, -.: :
"In the present case, since the petitioners were already residing in Canada before the registration of FIR in question i.e. since the year 1997, there was no occasion for them to conceal themselves or abscond. A perusal of order dated 7#10#2008 (Annexure P#10) and order dated 21#12# 2007 (Annexure P# 4) does not reveal that the petitioners
were ever attempted to be served in Canada especially when there was no material on record that the petitioners had left the country after the registration of FIR in question with a view to abscond or conceal themselves. Rather in the inquiries conducted by the police, the petitioners were found to be innocent because the alleged papers in question were prepared in Canada. Thus, the petitioners were declared proclaimed offenders in violation of Section 82, Criminal Procedure Code. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 7#10#2008 (Annexure P#10), whereby the petitioners were declared proclaimed offenders, is set aside."
!
2& $# : & :&& # ?
$ &
&&& # & $ / &> $
;
$2&& 8
# .
:
:
:
& !"22
$1
& # & &$ "- "- - () *+, :
& # #.
:
%! &
Poonam Negi Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No