Allowed

Tarun Kumar v. State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Delhi HC3 Sept 2024CRL.M.C./6831/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside an order declaring the petitioner a proclaimed offender under Section 528 BNSS. The Court held that since the petitioner had filed an anticipatory bail application and joined proceedings via video conference, the lower court erred in declaring him a proclaimed offender.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order declaring petitioner as proclaimed offender dated 20.08.2024 is set aside.

Tarun Kumar Vs State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~63

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 6831/2024, CRL.M.A. 26118/2024

¶4

TARUN KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Maninder Singh, Sr.Adv. with Mr.Ajay Kumar Pipaniya, Ms.Diksha Dharia, Ms.Nikita Garg, Mr.Harijas Pratap Singh, Mr.Sandeep Mittal, Mr.Paras Punyani and Mr.Tarang Pandit, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE (GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr.Sanjeev Bhandari, ASC (Crl.) for State with Ms.Charu Sharma, Mr.Arjit Sharma, Mr.Vaibhav Vats and Mr.Nikunj Bindal, Advocates alongwith Insp./SHO Pramod Kumar, P.S. Mayur Vihar Phase-I.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA O R D E R % 03.09.2024

¶9

Petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNSS’) has been preferred on behalf of the petitioner for setting aside impugned order dated 20.08.2024 passed by learned JMIC, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi whereby petitioner was declared as Proclaimed Offender in FIR No. 147/2024, under Section 302 IPC registered at P.S. Mayur Vihar PH-1.

¶10

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner was unaware of the proceedings taken up on registration of FIR and got apprised on issue of

¶11

CRL.M.C. 6831/2024

¶12

Page 1 of 3

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/09/2024 at 14:26:31

¶14

proclamation process by learned MM under Section 82 Cr.P.C., directing him to appear before the Court on 20.08.2024. He further submits that an application for anticipatory bail was accordingly filed by petitioner on 16.08.2024 before learned ASJ concerned in FIR No.147/2024, under Section 302 IPC registered at P.S. Mayur Vihar Phase-I. Further since aforesaid application on listing for hearing on 17.08.2024, was kept for consideration on 02.09.2024, petitioner could not appear before the learned MM in person on 20.08.2024. The aforesaid fact is stated to be known to the Investigating Agency when the impugned order dated 20.08.2024 was passed by learned MM declaring the petitioner as proclaimed offender, and despite an application for recalling of process issued under Section 82 Cr.P.C. having filed before learned MM. It is also pointed out that on 20.08.2024, petitioner had also joined proceedings before learned MM through VC.

¶15

Learned ASC for State fairly does not dispute the factual position and submits that in view of filing of application for anticipatory bail, learned MM should have deferred proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, apparently, since an application for anticipatory bail had already been preferred on record by the petitioner on 16.08.2024 and had duly joined the proceedings before learned MM through VC on 20.08.2024, he could not have been declared as proclaimed offender on 20.08.2024. In the facts and circumstances, impugned order dated 20.08.2024 passed by learned JMIC, East District, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi declaring petitioner as proclaimed offender is set aside with liberty to State to proceed, in accordance with law.

CRL.M.C. 6831/2024

Page 2 of 3

Petition is accordingly disposed of. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶21

A copy of this order be forwarded to the learned Trial Court for information.

¶22

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J.

¶23

SEPTEMBER 03, 2024/v

¶24

CRL.M.C. 6831/2024

¶25

Page 3 of 3

¶26

Tarun Kumar v. State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tarun Kumar v. State(Govt. of NCT of Delhi) and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vikas Tokas @ Vicky Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Suraj Sharma and Ors. Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Lokesh Vs the State Gnct of Delhi

Parth Dua Vs State NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Rashwani Kohli & Anr. Vs State (Government of Net of Delhi) through Sho, Ps-Bharat Nagar & Anr.

Jitender Kumar Vs State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Anr.