(1) If someone else is the owner of the property, then how can the court order its attachment under Section 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code? Section 83 uses the expression: “…attachment of any property, moveable or immovable or both, belonging to the proclaimed person”. Husband of the proclaimed offender is considered to be a different person.
(2) Ownership of property can be proved by the usual documents, such as mutation entries, registered sale deed, records of the revenue authorities / municipal authorities, or any other such document which can conclusively prove the ownership.
(3) Provisions in the Evidence Act relating to burden of proof would definitely be useful. But, the first burden is on the person who is asserting the fact. In your case, if you want the property to be attached on the ground that the property belongs to the proclaimed person, then you will have to first prove this fact. Please note that the word proved is defined in Section 3 of the Evidence Act as under:
““Proved”.—A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists.”
The words disproved and “not proved” are also defined in Section 3. Please see them.
In your case, since there appear to be contradictory facts for ownership of property, it may come under not proved. This will not shift the burden to the opposite party. In such circumstances, it would be difficult to get the attachment of property. You should get some clinching evidence in this regard.
(4) Action under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C. is not mandatory. The word used is “may” and that too followed by the expression, “for reasons to be recorded in writing”. Therefore, in appropriate cases, Section 174-A IPC may be applied directly after Section 82 Cr.P.C. proclamation if the proclaimed person fails to appear in spite of such proclamation. However, Section 229-A IPC does not appear to be applicable since no bail was granted to accused in your case, as it appears from your question.
Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.
.
