Judicial satisfaction of absconsion justifies issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

The petitioner is an accused in Jharia P.S. Case No. 83 of 2023, involving offences under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

On 24.11.2025, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM), Dhanbad, issued a non-bailable warrant and subsequently directed the issuance of a proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) after being satisfied that the petitioner was evading arrest.

On 12.02.2026, the Investigating Officer (IO) moved a petition for a fresh proclamation, stating that the previous process could not be executed due to his engagement in law and order duties.

The ACJM subsequently issued a fresh proclamation fixing the appearance date for 02.04.2026.

The petitioner moved the High Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, seeking to quash the orders dated 24.11.2025 and 12.02.2026, alleging they were passed without judicial application of mind and without receipt of the execution report of the non-bailable warrant.

Whether the orders dated 24.11.2025 and 12.02.2026 directing the issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. were legally sustainable and based on sufficient material.

Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 to quash the proclamation proceedings.

Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which governs the procedure for issuing a proclamation for a person who is absconding or concealing himself to evade the execution of a warrant.

Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 (the successor to Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.), regarding the High Court's inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice.

The Court examined the lower court's records and found that the ACJM had issued the proclamation on 24.11.2025 only after being satisfied from the materials on record that the petitioner was absconding and evading arrest.

Regarding the petitioner’s contention that no execution report was submitted, the Court noted the State's submission that the IO had indeed submitted a report indicating that a raid was conducted at the petitioner’s house and that he was found absconding due to fear of arrest.

The Court observed that the subsequent order on 12.02.2026 for a fresh proclamation was justified because the previous process remained unexecuted due to the IO's administrative exigencies.

Consequently, the Court found no procedural or legal infirmity in the ACJM's satisfaction or the resulting orders.

The Court declined to exercise its inherent power under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023, as the petitioner failed to demonstrate any merit in his challenge.

The Criminal Miscellaneous Petition was dismissed.