Daljit Singh Vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [Criminal Appeal No. 4359 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 12606/2023]
- ByPravleen Kaur --
- 15 Jun 2025 --
- 0 Comments
The Supreme Court of India in Daljit Singh vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [Criminal Appeal No. 4359 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 12606/2023] delivered its judgment on January 2, 2025, addressing the quashing of criminal proceedings and the status of the appellant as a proclaimed offender.
Facts and Background
Daljit Singh was declared a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) in connection with an FIR registered under Section 174A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which deals with non-appearance before a public servant. The case pertained to an incident dating back to 2010 involving a monetary dispute. The appellant challenged the High Court’s refusal to quash the complaint, summoning order, and the proclamation against him.
Legal Issues
The Supreme Court examined:
Whether the High Court was justified in refusing to quash the complaint and summoning order against the appellant.
The legal status and consequences of a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC and its relation to the substantive offence under Section 174A IPC.
Whether the criminal proceedings should continue given the elapsed time and the payment of the disputed money.
Court’s Analysis and Findings
The Court held that Section 174A IPC is an independent and substantive offence that can continue even if the proclamation under Section 82 CrPC is extinguished. However, in the facts of this case, the appellant had been acquitted, indicating no case existed requiring his presence.
The Court noted that the original offence dated back to 2010 and the money subject to dispute had been paid. Considering these circumstances, the Court found no justification to continue the criminal proceedings.
The appellant’s status as a proclaimed person was quashed, and all criminal proceedings, including the FIR under Section 174A IPC, were ordered to be closed. The judgment of the High Court refusing to quash the proceedings was set aside.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court allowed Daljit Singh’s appeal, quashing all criminal proceedings against him and extinguishing his proclaimed offender status. The decision underscores that:
The substantive offence under Section 174A IPC can survive extinguishment of proclamation but must be supported by a viable case.
Delay and resolution of the underlying dispute (payment of money) justify quashing of proceedings.
Proclaimed offender status is not permanent and can be revoked when no case exists.
This judgment highlights the Court’s approach to balancing procedural safeguards with substantive justice, preventing misuse of criminal law in protracted disputes with no real basis for prosecution.
RELATED Blog
0 comments