Himachal Pradesh High Court
CRMMO/1284/2022 on 30 December 2022
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA
Cr.MMO No.1284 of 2022
Date of Decision: December 30, 2022
Ram Rattan Sharma
…Petitioner.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh & another
..Respondents.
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vivek Singh Thakur, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the Petitioner: Mr.R.L. Chaudhary, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr.Hemant Vaid, Additional Advocate General, for respondent No.1-State.
Notice not issued to respondent No.2
Vivek Singh Thakur, J (oral)
Present petition has been been preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 29.11.2016, passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., in Complaint No.85-3 of 2013, titled as Dinesh Kumar Sharma vs. Ram Rattan Sharma, whereby petitioner has been declared as proclaimed offender.
2. For the order proposed to be passed hereinafter, no notice is required to be issued to respondent No.2.
3. I have gone through the impugned order and the material placed before me. I do not find any infirmity, illegality or perversity in the impugned order. Otherwise also, as per provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘Cr.P.C.’), for setting aside proclamation, petitioner has to approach the Court, which has declared him proclaimed offender. However, taking a lenient view, petitioner is permitted to appear before Additional Chief Judicial
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16627 ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:15:54 :::CIS
Magistrate, Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., by submitting and surrendering him to the jurisdiction of the said Court with an appropriate application for recalling proclamation issued against him and to join proceedings thereafter, by citing appropriate reasons for his absence from the Court. Petitioner is directed to approach the aforesaid Court on 13.01.2023 and in case such application is preferred by the petitioner, Magistrate shall consider the said application on its own merit, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.
4. Till 13.01.2023, petitioner shall not be arrested in furtherance to proclamation issued against him in Complaint No.85- 3 of 2013, titled as Dinesh Kumar Sharma vs. Ram Rattan Sharma, and, thereafter, he shall be governed and abide by further orders passed by the Magistrate. In case, petitioner fails to approach the Magistrate on or before 13.01.2023, interim protection granted in his favour against arrest, shall stand vacated without need of any reference to this Court and Magistrate and he shall be dealt with in accordance with law.
5. Petition stands disposed of in aforesaid terms, so also pending application(s), if any.
(Vivek Singh Thakur),
Judge.
December 30, 2022
(Purohit) High Court of H.P. 2022:HHC:16627 ::: Downloaded on - 01/11/2026 04:15:54 :::CIS