The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh set aside a prosecution under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code where the accused, already in judicial custody, could not have willfully evaded the court. The judgment clarifies the scope of the Court’s inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings that amount to an abuse of process.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Arvind Ashat, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking the quashing of FIR No.106 dated 31.08.2018, registered under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, at Police Station Phul. The FIR stemmed from proclamation proceedings initiated after the petitioner failed to appear in a case arising from a complaint under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, where he had been declared a proclaimed offender.
Key Facts
- FIR No.106 was registered on 31.08.2018 under Section 174-A IPC.
- The petitioner was in judicial custody from 26.04.2018 to 13.08.2021 in connection with FIR No.50 dated 31.03.2017, registered at Police Station North (Sector-3), Chandigarh.
- The proclamation order declaring the petitioner a proclaimed offender was issued while he was already detained; the house where service was purportedly effected had been sold and was locked by the Chandigarh Police.
- The petitioner could not intentionally evade the court because of his incarceration, a fact not placed before the trial court before the proclamation proceedings commenced.
- The Supreme Court in Daljit Singh v. State of Haryana (Criminal Appeal No.4359 of 2024) clarified the principles governing prosecution under Section 174-A IPC, emphasizing that non-appearance while in custody does not constitute a wilful evasion.
Procedural History
- 31.08.2018: FIR No.106 registered under Section 174-A IPC at Police Station Phul.
- 26.04.2018 - 13.08.2021: Petitioner remained in judicial custody for FIR No.50 (31.03.2017).
- Date of proclamation order: Not specified in the record, but it was issued while petitioner was detained.
- 02.01.2025: Supreme Court decision in Daljit Singh v. State of Haryana laid down principles on Section 174-A IPC.
- 04.08.2026: High Court delivered the present judgment quashing the FIR and related proceedings.
Parties' Positions
- Petitioner: Argued that the FIR was an abuse of process because the proclamation was defective and the petitioner was in judicial custody, rendering any alleged non-appearance non-wilful. Relied on the Supreme Court’s principles in Daljit Singh.
- State: Contended that the proclamation was valid, the petitioner deliberately failed to appear, and that factual disputes regarding custody and service of proclamation could not be decided in a Section 482 petition.
Relief Sought
The petitioner prayed for the quashing of FIR No.106 dated 31.08.2018 and all consequential proceedings arising therefrom.
