Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1435 (HP)

Vinod Chadha v. State of H. P.

2016-07-20

DHARAM CHAND CHAUDHARY

body2016
JUDGMENT : Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J. The petitioner has been declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 30.11.2010 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Manali, District Kullu in a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act registered as Criminal Case No. 274-I-08. The copy of the order has been placed on record by filing an application, Cr.M.P No. 552 of 2016. Learned counsel has produced certified copy of order passed in another complaint registered as Case No. 273-I-08 and in that case also, the petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender. 2. During the course of arguments, learned counsel representing the petitioner has apprised this Court that in an outside Court settlement, the accused-petitioner has settled the matter with the complainant amicably in both the cases. The relief in this petition, has also been restricted only to the extent of protecting the accused-petitioner from his arrest in order to enable him to put in appearance in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class at Manali, District Kullu, so that he can settle both the cases with the complainant (respondent No.2 herein) amicably. 3. The provisions contained under Section 41(1) (c) Cr.P.C. reveal that a person having been declared as proclaimed offender can be arrested by the police even without issuance of any warrant of arrest also. Not only this but, as per Section 43 of the Act, such person can even be arrested by a private person. The apprehension of the accused-petitioner, therefore, is that while on the way to appear in the Court, there is likelihood of his being arrested. 4. True it is that the Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh versus Pradeep Sharma, (2014) 2 SCC 171 has held that a person, who has been declared as proclaimed offender, cannot be granted anticipatory bail. The order proposed to be passed in this application, however, is not to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioner and rather to protect him from his arrest so that while in transit to surrender in the trial Court he is not arrested. The compromise having been arrived at between the accused-petitioner and the complainant also weigh with this Court while granting him protection to this limited extent. 5. The petition, as such, is allowed. The compromise having been arrived at between the accused-petitioner and the complainant also weigh with this Court while granting him protection to this limited extent. 5. The petition, as such, is allowed. Consequently, there shall be a direction that the accused-petitioner, Vinod Chadha, who has been declared as proclaimed offender by learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Manali in criminal Cases No. 273-I-08 and 274-I-08, shall not be arrested on his way to appear and surrender in the trial Court on or before 4th August, 2016. It is made clear that this order will remain in force only up to 4th August, 2016. It is left open to learned trial Judge to consider and pass appropriate order as to whether the accused-petitioner is to be released on regular bail or detained in custody. 6. This petition stands disposed of accordingly. Pending applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.