Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Rammi Paramjeetsingh Rajput, was arraigned as original accused No. 14 in C.R. No. 37/2021 registered at Gangapur Police Station, Nashik, for offences under Sections 302, 115, 120B, 201 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 4 and 25 of the Arms Act, with subsequent addition of Sections 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA). The applicant filed an application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of the proclamation order dated 6th July 2021 passed by the learned Special Court, Nashik, under Section 82 CrPC. The applicant contended that the learned Judge did not comply with the requirement of Section 82 CrPC, as no clear notice of 30 days was given. The order required the applicant to appear on 3rd August 2021, which was less than 30 days from the date of the order. Additionally, the order was served on the applicant's relative on 13th July 2021, leaving only 21 days. The learned APP did not dispute the fact that 30 clear days were not given. The court, after perusing the papers and hearing the parties, held that the proclamation order could not be sustained as the mandatory requirement of 30 clear days notice under Section 82(1) CrPC was not complied with. The court quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 6th July 2021, but clarified that the trial court was at liberty to issue a fresh proclamation in accordance with law. The application was allowed and disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Proclamation under Section 82 CrPC - Mandatory 30-day notice - The court held that Section 82(1) CrPC requires a clear notice of 30 days to be given before issuing a proclamation against an absconding accused. In this case, the order dated 6th July 2021 required appearance on 3rd August 2021, which was less than 30 days, and the order was served on 13th July 2021, leaving only 21 days. The proclamation was quashed for non-compliance. (Paras 3-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the proclamation order under Section 82 CrPC is valid when the court did not give 30 clear days notice as required by the provision
Final Decision
The application is allowed. The impugned order dated 6th July 2021 passed by the learned Special Court, Nashik, issuing proclamation under Section 82 CrPC against the applicant is quashed and set aside. However, the trial court is at liberty to issue a fresh proclamation in accordance with law. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Section 82 CrPC requires 30 clear days notice before issuing proclamation
- non-compliance renders proclamation invalid
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (08) 51
Criminal Application No.560 of 2021
Mr. Hrishikesh Mundargi i/b Mr. Varun Thokal for the Applicant, Mr. A. R. Patil, A.P.P for the Respondent–State
Rammi Paramjeetsingh Rajput
The State of Maharashtra, Commissioner of Police, Nashik City, Asst. Commissioner of Police Investigating Officer Mr. Samir Shaikh
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proclamation order under Section 82 CrPC
Remedy Sought
Quashing and setting aside of the order dated 6th July 2021 issuing proclamation under Section 82 CrPC against the applicant
Filing Reason
The applicant challenged the proclamation order on the ground that the learned Special Court did not give 30 clear days notice as required under Section 82(1) CrPC
Previous Decisions
The learned Special Court, Nashik passed the proclamation order dated 6th July 2021 under Section 82 CrPC
Issues
Whether the proclamation order under Section 82 CrPC is valid when the court did not give 30 clear days notice as required by the provision
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant argued that the order issuing proclamation cannot be sustained as the learned Judge did not comply with the requirement of Section 82 CrPC, i.e., no clear notice of 30 days was given as contemplated under Section 82(1) CrPC.
The learned APP did not dispute the fact that 30 clear days were not given as contemplated under Section 82 CrPC and that the order dated 6th July 2021 was served on applicant's relative on 13th July 2021.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 82(1) CrPC mandates that a clear notice of 30 days must be given before issuing a proclamation against an absconding accused. Non-compliance with this mandatory requirement renders the proclamation order invalid and liable to be quashed.
Judgment Excerpts
By this application, the applicant seeks quashing and setting-aside of the order dated 6th July 2021 passed by the learned Special Court, Nashik, issuing proclamation as against the applicant under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (`Cr.P.C').
Learned counsel for the applicant states that the order issuing proclamation cannot be sustained, inasmuch as, the learned Judge has not complied with the requirement of Section 82 of Cr.P.C, whilst issuing proclamation i.e. no clear notice of 30 days has been given as contemplated under Section 82(1) Cr.P.C.
Learned A.P.P does not dispute the fact that 30 clear days were not given as contemplated under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
Procedural History
The applicant was arraigned as original accused No. 14 in C.R. No. 37/2021 for offences under IPC, Arms Act, and MCOCA. The learned Special Court, Nashik passed an order dated 6th July 2021 issuing proclamation under Section 82 CrPC against the applicant. The applicant filed Criminal Application No.560 of 2021 under Section 482 CrPC before the Bombay High Court seeking quashing of the proclamation order. The High Court heard the parties and passed judgment on 4th August 2021.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 82
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 115, 120B, 201, 34
- Arms Act, 1959: 4, 25
- Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA): 3(1)(i)(ii), 3(2), 3(4)
