In a recent judgment, the Jaipur bench of the Rajasthan High Court emphasized that the primary objective of initiating proceedings under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is to secure the presence of an accused person who is evading arrest. Once this objective is achieved, any related proceedings, including property attachment under Section 83, should be withdrawn.
Case Background
The petitioner faced charges of criminal breach of trust, leading to the issuance of arrest warrants. However, for approximately nine years, no summons, warrants, or proclamations were effectively served to him. The process server's reports indicated that the petitioner was not residing at the addresses where the notices were dispatched. Upon becoming aware of the proceedings, the petitioner promptly filed an application to recall the warrants and requested the cessation of the ongoing proceedings. Despite this, the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) ordered the attachment of the petitioner's properties under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC.
Legal Provisions: Sections 82 and 83 CrPC
Section 82 of the CrPC pertains to the proclamation for a person absconding. It allows a court to publish a written proclamation requiring an accused person to appear at a specified place and time if it believes that the individual is evading arrest. Following this, Section 83 deals with the attachment of the property of such an absconding person, providing the court with the authority to order the attachment of the accused's properties to compel their appearance.
Court's Observations and Judgment
Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, presiding over the case, referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Vimlaben Ajitbhai Patel vs. Vatslaben Ashokbhai Patel & Ors. (2008). In that ruling, the apex court held that the purpose of initiating proceedings under Section 82 CrPC is to procure and secure the presence of the accused. Once this purpose is achieved, the proceedings should be withdrawn. The Supreme Court further clarified that the provisions of the CrPC do not warrant the sale of the property if the absconding accused has surrendered and obtained bail. Once the accused surrenders before the court and the standing warrants are canceled, they are no longer considered an absconder.
In the present case, the High Court noted that the arrest warrants issued against the petitioner were never served or executed because he was not residing at the addresses where the notices were sent. Consequently, the petitioner was unaware of the proceedings against him. Upon learning of the situation, he appeared before the trial court and submitted an application to recall the proceedings initiated under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC.
The High Court concluded that since the petitioner had already appeared before the trial court and the primary objective of securing his presence had been fulfilled, the continuation of proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 was unwarranted. Therefore, the court quashed the ACJM's order directing the attachment of the petitioner's properties and allowed the petition.
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment reinforces the principle that the mechanisms provided under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC are primarily tools to ensure an accused person's presence before the court. Once this objective is met, especially if the accused has surrendered and is participating in the legal process, the continuation of such proceedings, including property attachment, becomes redundant and should be terminated.
The ruling also underscores the importance of proper service of summons and warrants. Courts must ensure that due process is followed and that accused individuals are adequately informed of proceedings against them. Initiating proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 without ensuring proper service can lead to unwarranted actions against individuals who may be unaware of the charges or proceedings.
Conclusion
The Rajasthan High Court's decision serves as a crucial reminder of the intended purpose of Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC. It emphasizes that these provisions are designed to secure the presence of an accused person and are not punitive measures. Once an accused complies by appearing before the court, any ancillary proceedings, such as property attachment, should be promptly withdrawn to uphold the principles of justice and fairness.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.