SANJAY BHANDARI Vs. STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impugns order dated 08.01.2018 to the limited extent, the Trial court has declared the petitioner as a 'proclaimed offender'.

(2.) The fulcrum of the challenge to the said order is based on the premise that the petitioner has not been accused of any of the offences mentioned in Section 82(4) of the Criminal procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) and, thus, it is contended that declaration of the petitioner as a proclaimed offender is unwarranted. It is contended that even if the proceedings under Section 82(1) to 82(3) of Cr.P.C. is completed qua the petitioner, the petitioner could not be declared as a proclaimed offender as he is not accused of any offences mentioned under Section 82(4) Cr.P.C. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Rajasthan High Court in Rishabh Sethi vs. State of Rajasthan, judgment dated 08.03.2018 in S.B. Crl.Misc.(Petition) No.5767/2017.

(3.) Per contra, it is contended on behalf of the State that even though the petitioner may not have been accused of the offences mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C., the petitioner can still be declared as a proclaimed offender as the procedure contemplated in Section 82(1) to 82(3) has been complied with. It is contended that the term 'proclaimed offender' can also be used in respect of individuals who are accused of offences other than those mentioned in Section 82(4) Cr.P.C, though consequences may be different. Reliance is placed on the decisions of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Crl.Misc.No. No.30146/2011 titled Rajiv vs. State of Haryana dated 12.10.2011 and Crl.M.359/2012 titled Deeksha Puri vs. State of Haryana, (2013) 1 RCR(Cri) 159 (2) decided on 16.10.2012.