Read Time: 06 minutes

The Single Bench of Justice Anu Malhotra of Delhi High Court has recently observed that FIR registered u/s 406, 420 & 120B of IPC does not fall within the ambit of Section 82(4) of the Cr.PC, 1973 and that the applicant cannot be declared a Proclaimed Offender.

“FIR registered u/s 406, 420 & 120B of IPC sought to be invoked by the Investigating Agency do not fall within the ambit of Section 82(4) of the Cr.PC, 1973 and thus the applicant cannot be declared a Proclaimed Offender thereunder in view of the verdict of this Court in in Manoj Tandon Vs. State in Crl.M.C.1961/2020, dated 25.11.2020 whereby there is a reference made to the verdict of this Court in Sanjay Bhandari vs. State in Crl.Rev.Pet.No.223/2018, a verdict dated 31.07.2018, the verdict of the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan in Rishabh Sethi vs. State of Rajasthan and Ors. in Petition No.5767/2017. The order dated 03.03.2021 of the learned trial Court directing the issuance of process under Section 82 of the Cr.PC, 1973 against the petitioner in FIR No.147/2020, PS EOW, under Sections 406/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 is quashed.”, the Bench remarked.

The Bench was deciding a petition filed for quashing two orders, the first one dated 05.01.2021 vide which the petitioner’s prayer for seeking cancellation of non bailable warrants issued against him on 02.03.2021 in FIR No 147/2020 u/s 406, 420 & 120B of IPC was declined & the second one dated 03.03.2021 in which process u/s 82 CrPC was issued against the petitioner in relation to the said FIR by the Trial Court. 

The petitioner’s Counsel relied on Inder Mohan Goswami and Ors. vs. State of Uttaranchal and Ors. in Crl.A.1392/2007 dated 09.10.2007 to submit that personal liberty is paramount and that the issuance of a warrant whether bailable or non-bailable is entirely the Court’s discretion which has to be exercised with care. As issuance of non-bailable warrants involves interference with personal liberty and the Courts have to be extremely careful before issuing non-bailable warrants which can be issued to bring a person to Court when summons or bailable warrants are unlikely to have the desired result. 

Reliance was also made to State through C.B.I. vs. Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar and Ors., a verdict dated 07.05.1997 by the petitioner to contend that a warrant of arrest under Section 73 of the Cr.PC,1973 cannot be issued by the Courts solely for the production of the accused before the police in aid of investigation.

Reference was also made to the Apex Court judgement in Vikas vs. State of Rajasthan, in Crl.A.1190/2013, a verdict dated 16.08.2013 to argue that the Court at the first instance should issue summon or bailable warrants failing which it should issue non-bailable warrants. 

Thus, the Court while disposing of the present petition set aside the order dated 05.01.2021 vide which the petitioner’s prayer of cancellation of non bailable warrants was declined & also quashed the order dated 03.03.2021 by which directions to declare the petitioner as proclaimed offender were issued. 

Case Title: Arun Kumar Parihar v. State (Govt NCTD)

Law Point/Statute Involved: Section 82 CrPC & Section 406,420 & 120B IPC