Allowed

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Feb 2020Cr.M.P./10/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed criminal miscellaneous petition quashing multiple impugned orders for issuing processes under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. and declaring the petitioner a permanent absconder, ruling they were cryptic and violated Section 82(3) Cr.P.C. due to lack of recorded subjective satisfaction.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 07.10.2015, 06.11.2017, 08.12.2017 regarding processes and declaration as permanent absconder set aside; revisional order dated 04.11.2019 set aside; matter remitted to court bel

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No. 10 of 2020

¶3

Vinay Kumar Singh @ Vinay Kumar @ Binay Kumar

¶4

Baby Devi..…....... Petitioner (s) Versus State of Jharkhand………… Opp. Party(s)

¶5

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶6

…… For the Petitioner : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate For the State : A.P.P.

¶7

4/03.02.2020 The defect pointed out by the office is still remaining as in the first page of the petition in the cause title the year of the case has wrongly been typed as 2019 in place of 2020.

¶8

Counsel for the petitioners submits that he will rectify the same defect and will make necessary correction during course of the day.

¶9

Prayer is allowed, subject to deposit of cost of Rs. 500/- to be deposited in the account of the Advocates’ Association, High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi.

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

The petitioners, are aggrieved by the order dated 07.10.2015, by which process under Sections 82 Cr.P.C has been issued against him. He is also aggrieved by the order dated 06.11.2017, by which processes under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. has been issued simultaneously against him. He is also aggrieved by the order dated 08.12.2017, whereby the petitioner has been declared as a permanent absconder. Further, he challenged the order dated 04.11.2019, whereby his revision application has been dismissed as non-maintainable by the Sessions Judge, Deoghar.

¶12

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the impugned orders are absolutely cryptic, vague and bad in law and not in compliance with the provisions of Cr.P.C., thus, the same needs to be quashed.

¶13

After going through the impugned orders, I find that all the orders are absolutely cryptic and do not even reflect any subjective satisfaction as to why it is necessary to issue processes under Sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. I also find that without complying the mandatory provision of Section 82(3) Cr.P.C. process has been issued. It is mandate of the law that while issuing process under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court below has to record subjective satisfaction. It is also the duty of the Court to record subjective satisfaction as to why process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is to be issued and consequently under Section 83 Cr.P.C.

¶14

-2-

¶15

In the instant case, the court below, in a mechanical manner, without recording any subjective satisfaction has issued processes under Section 82 & 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since, the subjective satisfaction is missing, I am inclined to allow this criminal miscellaneous petition. Accordingly, the same is hereby allowed. The impugned orders dated 07.10.2015, 06.11.2017 & 08.12.2017, by which processes under Section 82 & 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been issued and the petitioner was declared as a permanent absconder are hereby set aside. Consequently, the revisional order dated 04.11.2019 is also hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the court below to proceed afresh accordingly as per law.

¶16

This criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed.

¶17

Mukund/-cp.3

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Singh Alias Vinoy Kumar Alias Binay Kumar 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

Shyam Bihari Rajwar Alias Shyam Bihari Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ranjit Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Ushmani Aind Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Amit Kumar Verma Alias Amit Verma Vs State of Jharkhand

Naresh Ravidas Vs State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Shyam Bihari Rajwar Alias Shyam Bihari Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ranjit Kumar Singh Vs State of Jharkhand

Ushmani Aind Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar  Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.

Amit Kumar Verma Alias Amit Verma Vs State of Jharkhand

Naresh Ravidas Vs State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Kumar Dharmendra Kr.Verma And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand And Anr.