Crl. Misc. No. M-39029 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-39029 of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision : 22.12.2011 Ram Kishan …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others …Respondents ………. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH -.- 1. Whether Reporters of local newspapers may be allowed to see judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. Rajesh Punj, Advocate, for the petitioner. *** Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Notice of motion. Mr. Abhishek Chautala, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, has accepted notice on behalf of respondents. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, present petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself. Record reveals that petitioner had filed civil suit for permanent prohibitory injunction being Civil Suit No.301 of 1995 which was decreed in favour of the petitioner on 04.09.1998. Petitioner had also filed another suit for mandatory injunction against Gram Panchayat and others for constructing drain to avoid accumulation of waste water damaging the house of the Crl. Misc. No. M-39029 of 2011 (O&M) 2 petitioner. Second suit for mandatory injunction was also decreed by the trial court on 10.12.2003 and decree was upheld by this Court in Regular Second Appeal No.1980 of 2009 vide judgment dated 13.05.2011. During the pendency of civil suit, Darshan Singh the then SHO, Police Station Pathankot, called the petitioner in the police station and forced him to sign compromise dated 23.10.1998 while keeping the petitioner under illegal detention. Petitioner filed a private complaint before the Magistrate against Darshan Singh, SHO, Police Station Sadar, Pathankot. Learned Magistrate initially issued the summoning order, however, despite of several summons and warrants accused Darshan Singh failed to appear before the Magistrate. Proclamation was issued against Darshan Singh under sub-section (1) of Section 82 Cr.P.C. and thereafter he was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 07.11.2009. Darshan Singh, Inspector of Punjab Police is not being arrested by other officials of the Punjab Police despite of several warrants and declaring him proclaimed offender vide order dated 07.11.2009. Petitioner has knocked the door of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. directing the respondents to ensure the arrest of Darshan Singh, Inspector, to face the trial before the learned Magistrate. Learned counsel contends that Inspector Darshan Singh has also committed an offence punishable under Section 174-A IPC. He should not be allowed to be on duty and he should be arrested forthwith and should be challaned under Section 174-A IPC as well. Section 174 A of IPC reads as under :- 174 A Non-appearance in response to a proclamation under section 82 of Act 2 of 1974.- Whoever fails to appear at the specified place and the specified time as required by a proclamation published under sub-section (1) of section 82 of the Code of Crl. Misc. No. M-39029 of 2011 (O&M) 3 Criminal Procedure, 1973 shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both, and where a declaration has been made under sub-section (4) of that section pronouncing him as a proclaimed offender, he shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine. Having read Section 174 A of IPC, this Court is of the view that not only Darshan Singh is bound to face trial before the Magistrate in a pending complaint, he should be charge sheeted under Section 174 A IPC for not appearing before the Magistrate despite of several warrants and order declaring him proclaimed offender under sub-section (4) of Section 82 Cr.P.C. Mr. Abhishek Chautala, learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, undertakes that suitable action shall be taken by the Punjab Police by arresting and producing Darshan Singh, SHO, before the Magistrate hearing the complaint. Mr. Chautala has failrly stated that since Darshan Singh, SHO, has failed to appear before the Magistrate despite of several warrants and order declaring him proclaimed offender, therefore, it seems that he has also committed an offence punishable under Section 174-A IPC which is cognizable and non-bailable. This is a matter of great concern that Sh. Darshan Singh the then S.H.O. Pathankot has avoided court appearance despite of summons, warrant, proclamation and declaration under Section 80 (4) Cr.P.C. as proclaimed offender. I am shocked to note that even higher officials of Punjab Police are avoiding arrest of Sh. Darshan Singh the then S.H.O. Punjab Police should have register an F.I.R. against Darshan Singh under Section 174-A I.P.C. and should have taken appropriate action thereon since offence under Section 174-A is cognizable and non-bailable. Crl. Misc. No. M-39029 of 2011 (O&M) 4 Present petition is disposed of with the direction to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur, to ensure the arrest of Inspector Darshan Singh and to produce him before learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Pathankot, forthwith wherein complaint is pending. Compliance report shall be forwarded to this Court within a month from today. Copy of this order be forwarded to D.G.P. Punjab and Home Secretary Punjab for compliance. A copy of this order be given to the learned State counsel under the signature of Court Secretary. ( Alok Singh ) December 22, 2011 Judge Anand