High Court of Jharkhand quashed non-bailable warrant orders issued by J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad, relying on a previous order quashing similar process without service report under Section 82 Cr.P.C., pending investigation into offences under IPC.
Impugned orders dated 27.6.2014 and 25.9.2014 quashed and set aside.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 2715 of 2014
Versus
CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P.P. BHATT
For the Petitioner(s) :Mr. Shailesh, Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. For Opp. Party No. 2 : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate.
3/05.12.2014: The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the orders dated 27.6.2014 and 25.9.2014 passed by the learned J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case no. 535 of 2013 for the offence under Sections 406, 420, 341, 323, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby and whereunder the non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners, now the case is pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the learned court below without receiving the service report and without assigning any reason whatsoever, has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners. In this context, the learned counsel for the petitioners has referred to and relied upon the order dated 3.4.2014 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 911 of 2014 whereby, a similar set of circumstances, the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was ordered to be quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that anticipatory bail petition being ABA No. 2226/2014 is pending before this Court and after decision of the said application, the petitioners will surrender before the learned court below and cooperate in the proceeding.
Per contra, learned counsel appearing for Opp. Party No. 2 submitted that the cognizance was taken on 19.11.2013 and since then, the petitioners having knowledge deliberately avoided the same and therefore, the learned court below has no option but to issue process under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
In view of the above submissions and from perusal of orders dated
27.6.2014 and 25.9.2014, it appears that the learned court below has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. against the petitioners without receiving service report of summons. Therefore, in view of order dated 3.4.2014 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 911/2014, the impugned Orders dated 27.6.2014 and 25.9.2014 passed by the learned J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad in C.P. Case no. 535 of 2013 are ordered to be quashed and set aside. However, it is expected from the petitioners that they shall cooperate in the proceeding as the cognizance has been taken in the month of November 2013.
Accordingly, this petition stands disposed of.
Let this order be communicated to the court below concerned through FAX at the cost of the petitioners.
Anu/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether Section 82 Cr.P.C. orders issuing non-bailable warrant can be quashed without service report in a Section 482 Cr.P.C. petition
Whether petitioners' deliberate avoidance of service justifies issuing process despite procedural lapses
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Unspecified PetitionRelied on¶13
Cr.M.P. No. 911 of 2014
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Bishwa Ranjan Tiwary
Ajay Kumar Saha
Jitendra Prasad Saha
The State of Jharkhand
Karpur Banerjee
P.P. Bhatt
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
