Allowed

Shambhu Singh And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC8 Feb 2017Cr.M.P./328/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed the order issuing a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against petitioners, noting the lack of subjective satisfaction and reasons in the order, disputed awareness of case withdrawal, and complainant's inaction over twelve years.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 10.08.2016 directing issuance of proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. against petitioners is quashed and set aside.

Shambhu Singh And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No. 328 of 2017 1. Shambhu Singh 2. Chintamani Devi .... Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party --CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, A.P.P. --- Order No. 05 Dated 08 th February, 2017

¶3

Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, learned A.P.P. appearing for the State.

¶4

At the outset, learned counsel for the submits that he is confining his argument with respect to the challenge of the order dated 10.08.2016.

¶5

In this application, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the orders dated 30.08.2014 and 10.08.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No. 524 of 2001, whereby non-bailable warrant of arrest and proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. respectively have been directed to be issued against the petitioners.

¶6

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that after the cognizance was taken, the petitioners had preferred Cr.M.P. No. 289 of 2002 in which an interim order of stay of further proceedings was passed on 13.05.2002. However the said Cr.M.P. was dismissed as withdrawn on 13.08.2014. It has further been submitted that the petitioners were not aware of the withdrawal of the said application and only after issuance of proclamation u/s 82 vide order dated 10.08.2016, they came to know of the aforesaid fact. It has further been submitted that the complainant was also disinterested in the proceedings as would appear from the order-sheet.

¶7

It appears that the proceedings in connection with this complaint case was remain stayed for about 12 years vide order passed in Cr.M.P. No. 289 of 2002 and the same was dismissed as withdrawn on 13.08.2014. Thereafter due to non-appearance of the petitioners vide order dated 30.08.2014 non-bailable warrant of arrest was directed to be issued which has subsequently followed by order dated 10.08.2016 directing issuance of proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. The entire order-sheet has been brought on record from which it appears that the complainant has also not taken steps in the complaint case. The petitioners seem to have given reasonable explanation with respect to their unawareness of

¶8

¶9

the status of the case. It further appears that the order dated 10.08.2016 does not reflect subjective satisfaction of the learned Magistrate, as no reasons have been assigned in the said order by which proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. has been ordered to be issued against the petitioners.

¶10

In such view of the matter, the impugned order dated 10.08.2016 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with C.P. Case No. 524 of 2001, whereby proclamation u/s 82 Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued against the petitioners, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶11

This application is allowed, as mentioned herein above.

¶12

However, the learned court below is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.

¶13

(RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, J.)

¶14

Shambhu Singh And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Singh And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aklim Ansari and Anr. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Ors.

Ansari Orain Vs State of Bihar

Nirmal Bhagat Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Subrato Kumar Gope Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Ainul Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Kamta Giri Vs State Of Jharkhand