URMILA DEVI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the instant writ petition the petitioner prays for quashing the order dated 20.2.2008 passed by the learned F.T.C. 5, Patna in S.T.No. 419 of 1995, whereby and where under the learned Court below rejected the prayer of the petitioner to recall the order dated 13.4.2007 by which fresh process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. was directed to be issued. The petitioner assailed the orders on two grounds. The first ground being that property sought to be attached did not belong to accused, rather it belong to the petitioner. Secondly, no attachment order can be issued under Section 83 Cr.P.C. only after 30 days of issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

(2.) ONE Nandeshwar Singh, the husband of the petitioner is an accused in Digha P.S. Case No. 141. of 1994 under Section 302 of the Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act which is pending for trial. It appears that the husband of the petitioner was granted provisional bail for two weeks by this Court by order dated 8.5.1996 passed in Cri. Misc. No. 6525 of 1996 with a direction to surrender on 25.5.1996 but he did not surrender on the aforesaid date. In fact he has not surrender till today. In the meantime the petitioner lodged a case being Pirbahore P.S. Case No. 156. of 1996 stating that her husband was kidnapped by some miscreants. However, in course of investigation the police found the case of kidnapping to be false. It would be relevant to state here that the process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. were issued by the learned Magistrate in the year 1996 and the property of accused was attached, but still the petitioner 'shusband did not surrender and remained at large. In course of time the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the Trial Court by order dated 8.1.2008 passed a composite order under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submits that the process under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. cannot be issued simultaneously. He submits that Section 82 Cr.P.C. deals with the proclamation for person absconding evading arrest, despite issuance of warrant. Section 83 Cr.P.C. deals with attachment of property of person absconding. He further submits that the order of attachment of property, moveable or immovable under Section 83 Cr.P.C. can only be issued when the proclamation for person absconding under Section 82 Cr.P.C has remained in publication for minimum period of thirty days. In support of his contention, he relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Deo Narayan Singh vs. State of Bihar, 1981 Cr.L.J. 1672.