A BNSS proclamation must record satisfaction of absconding and specify the accused’s time and place of appearance.

The petitioner, an accused in Tundi P.S. Case No. 44 of 2026, faced allegations under Sections 126(2), 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 118(2), 109(1), and 74 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad, by order dated 21 July 2026, directed issuance of proclamation proceedings under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without specifying the time and place at which the petitioner was required to appear.

The petitioner challenged the order under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, contending that the proclamation was legally defective.

The State argued that the petitioner was required to appear after 30 days from publication of the proclamation and that the order was therefore valid.

1. Whether a court issuing a proclamation against an accused must record satisfaction that the accused is absconding or concealing himself to evade arrest.

2. Whether the proclamation order must specifically state the time and place for the accused’s appearance.

3. Whether, in a case involving offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Magistrate was required to follow Section 84 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, corresponding to Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, rather than merely issuing process under Section 82 CrPC.

The Court applied the settled principle governing proclamation proceedings that the issuing court must record its satisfaction that the accused is absconding or concealing himself to evade arrest and must specify in the proclamation order the time and place for the accused’s appearance.

Under Section 4 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the procedure for investigation, inquiry, and trial of offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 is governed by the BNSS. Section 84 BNSS corresponds to Section 82 CrPC and therefore governs the issuance of proclamations in such proceedings.

The Magistrate’s order did not specify the time and place at which the petitioner was required to appear, a mandatory requirement for a valid proclamation under the governing procedural law.

Further, because the alleged offences were under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, the Magistrate was required to apply the corresponding provisions of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, particularly Section 84, rather than proceed by an unspecified direction under Section 82 CrPC.

The State’s contention that the petitioner had 30 days to appear did not cure the absence of a specific time and place in the order itself.

The Court accordingly found the Magistrate’s order legally unsustainable.

It quashed and set aside the order dated 21 July 2026 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad, in Tundi P.S. Case No. 44 of 2026, while granting liberty to the Magistrate to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was allowed to that extent.