P. N. SINHA, J. ( 1 ) THIS revisional application is directed against the order dated 3. 1. 2004 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia in G. R. Case No. 384/1997 arising out of Bagnan Police Police Station Case No. 94 dated 9. 7. 1997. ( 2 ) LEARNED Advocate for the petitioner contended that the learned magistrate by the impugned order dated 3. 1. 2004 issued warrant and also a writ of Proclamation and attachment by the same order and did not follow the provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ( 3 ) ACCORDINGLY, the said order being bad in law should be set aside and the articles seized from the house of the father of the alleged proclaimed offender should be returned. ( 4 ) LEARNED Advocate appearing for the State submits that the allegations are very serious and if the person is aggrieved, he could have moved the learned Court below by raising objection against the attachment and seizure of the property. ( 5 ) AFTER hearing the learned Advocates for the parties I find that by the impugned order dated 3. 1. 2004 the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial magistrate, Uluberia at the same time issued W/a and W. P. A. , i. e. , Writ of proclamation and Attachment by the same order. Of course, the impugned order reveals that the W/a was pending prior to that. At the time of passing the impugned order, as it appears, learned Magistrate did not follow the provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 82 indicates that the proclamation may be issued if the learned Magistrate has reason to believe that the Person against whom warrant has been issued has absconded or is concealing himself so that warrant cannot be executed the Court may publish a written proclamation requiring him to appear at a specified place and at a specified time not less than 30 days from the date of publishing such proclamation. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after issue of the proclamation, the Magistrate can issue order of attachment of any property moveable or immoveable or both belonging to the proclaimed person. ( 6 ) ACCORDING to Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure after issue of the proclamation, the Magistrate can issue order of attachment of any property moveable or immoveable or both belonging to the proclaimed person. The combined effect of these two Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of criminal Procedure indicates that the proclamation and attachment cannot be issued at the same time and attachment simultaneously with issue of proclamation can be made if Court by affidavit or otherwise is satisfied that the person in relation to whom the proclamation is to be issued is about to dispose of whole or any part of his property. ( 7 ) FOR those reasons, the order passed by the learned sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia which is totally silent regarding reason for issuing proclamation and attachment at the same time is not proper and legal and accordingly, the same is set aside. if the learned magistrate has reason to believe that the said persons are absconding, he will pass necessary order in accordance with law as provided in Sections 82 and 83 of the Code stating the reason therein. ( 8 ) THERE is nothing to show that the property which has been seized belongs to the proclaimed offenders and rather it appears that those were seized from the house of one Damodar Adhikary who is the father of the said offender Tapan Adhikary and Biswajit Adhikary. Damodar Adhikary is definitely not the proclaimed offender and therefore, the attachment of property of Damodar Adhikary being not proper the said articles should be returned to the person from whom those were seized. ( 9 ) THE learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Uluberia is directed to pass necessary order within a fortnight from the date of communication of this order. ( 10 ) THE revisionai application is thus disposed of. ( 11 ) CRIMINAL Section is directed to supply certified copy of this order, if applied for.