Tajinder Mohan Singh vs. The State (Government of NCT of Delhi)
Background
The petitioner was declared an absconder and then a "proclaimed offender" in a cheque-bounce case after summons and warrants sent to two addresses in Ludhiana went unserved, triggering a separate FIR against him for failing to appear in court. He argued he had not lived or worked at either address for years before the proceedings even began.
Decision Breakdown
The High Court traced the entire trial-court record and found that, at every stage, the police reports clearly stated the petitioner was not residing or working at the addresses used: yet the trial court kept escalating (summons, then bailable warrants, then non-bailable warrants, then proclamation) without ever questioning whether it had the right address. The Court quashed the FIR and, importantly, issued detailed directions requiring all trial courts to verify a person's correct address and record reasons in writing before declaring someone an absconder.
Lesson Learnt
A person cannot lawfully be branded an "absconder" simply because court papers sent to the wrong address were never delivered: courts must actually check that the address used is correct before taking such a serious step.