(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner contends that a perusal of the order dated 7.9.2005 shows that the complainant expressed his inability to provide the petitioner's correct address. Thereupon, instead of proceeding to dismiss the complaint, the learned trial Court, directed service upon the petitioner by proclamation and then declared the petitioner a proclaimed offender. As the order dated 7.9.2005 is illegal, the petitioner could not have been declared a proclaimed offender. Notice of motion for 7.8.2006. Process dasti only. In the meanwhile, the petitioner's arrest shall remain stayed, subject to his putting in appearance, before the trial Court, on or before the next date of hearing.