Satnam v. State Of Punjab And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 03.12.2024 Satnam

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP CHITKARA

Present:

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate and Ms. Mehak Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Ms. Swati Batra, D.A.G., Punjab.

**** ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

Complaint NACT/133/2017 dated 26.04.2017 titled "Kuldeep Singh vs Satnam No.

Singh" u/s 138 of NI Act, 1881 1.

Challenging the order dated 14.12.2023 of proclamation on being declared as proclaimed person in the complaint captioned above, the petitioner has come up before this court under section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, [BNSS]. 2.

Notice served upon the official respondent through State counsel. The nature of order which this Court proposes to pass, there is no necessity of calling any response from the State.

3.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not residing at the given address since long time and no notice has been served upon him. He submits that the petitioner is ready to join the proceedings before the trial Court. 4.

An analysis of the submissions and the petition would lead to the following outcome. It remains undisputed that when the petitioner got to know about he being declared proclaimed offender, he took legal remedy and came up before this Court. It also remains undisputed that it never happened that police officials caught him or tried to run

away to avoid an appearance in Court. In such a situation, the petitioner has proved his case by a preponderance of probabilities and has prima facie established that his nonappearance was beyond their control. The petitioner within a short span on his own came before this Court, undertaking to attend the trial, and it is not the police who have been able to arrest.

5.

Let the petitioner attend the trial because the criminal justice system must not hamper and suffer because of the petitioner.

6.

The primary object of the service is to secure the accused's presence at trial. The petitioner approached this court independently, establishing the bonafide at this stage. Without commenting on the case's merits, and in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, and also for the reasons mentioned above, the ends of justice would meet if the impugned proclamation order is quashed qua the petitioner. Thus, exercising the inherent powers under section 528 BNSS, it would be appropriate to grant the following limited relief to the petitioner, subject to the compliance of the conditions mentioned in this order.

7.

The State's counsel submitted that if this Court is granting any concession to the petitioner, it must be subject to some reprimand. The petitioner's counsel declared that if this court imposes reasonable and affordable costs, the petitioner shall deposit the same. 8.

Given above, the petitioner shall deposit Rs.5000/- in the PGI Poor Patients Welfare fund and hand over the receipt of deposit to trial Court by the next date. 9.

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the concerned court on 10.12.2024, 11.00 AM. On this date, if the petitioner files bail application(s), the concerned trial court to grant bail to the petitioner on surrendering before the concerned Court as the offence is bailable subject to furnishing bail bonds by imposing reasonable conditions deemed appropriate in the background of the accused's conduct. The petitioner is directed to appear on each date before the trial court and not to delay it. 10.

There shall be a stay of the petitioner's arrest in the case mentioned till 10.12.2024 5.00 P.M. This stay is subject to the petitioner's surrender, failing which this protection shall also be recalled. It is clarified that if the petitioner appears before the concerned court, then all warrants issued by the concerned court against the petitioner in the matter mentioned above shall automatically stand recalled and canceled.

11.

This order shall eclipse on 10.12.2024 at 6 P.M. 12.

Any observation made hereinabove is neither an expression of opinion on the case's merits nor shall the trial Court advert to these comments. 13.

A certified copy of this order would not be needed, and any Advocate for the Petitioner can download this order along with case status from the official web page of this Court and attest it to be a true copy. If the concerned court/ officer wants to verify its authenticity, such an officer can also verify its authenticity and may download and use the downloaded copy for attesting bonds.

Petition is partly allowed to the extent mentioned above. Liberty reserved to petitioner to challenge the FIR under Section 174-A IPC, if any registered pursuant to impugned order. All pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. (ANOOP CHITKARA) JUDGE 03.12.2024 Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes Whether reportable:

NO.