Allowed

Anil Kherwar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Jan 2020Cr.M.P./1243/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand set aside impugned orders under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. for being cryptic. The court held that without recorded material and subjective satisfaction, the orders were illegal in law, remitting the matter for a fresh order.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders dated 20.11.2017 and 11.01.2018 under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. were set aside and matter remitted.

Anil Kherwar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Writ and Judicial Review | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

Cr. M.P. No. 1243 of 2018

¶3

Anil Kherwar @ Prakash Kherwar

¶4

Raj Kumar Kherwar…..…....... Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand ………… Opp. Party

¶5

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶6

…… For the Petitioner : Mr. Pankaj Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Ravi Prakash, A.P.P.

¶7

7/13.01.2020 In this application, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20.11.2017, by which processes under Sections 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued. He also challenges the order dated 11.01.2018, by which attachment order has been issued in terms of Section 83 Cr.P.C.

¶8

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the order is cryptic and does not reflect any subjective satisfaction as required by the law. He submits that the proviso to Section 82 Cr.P.C. has to be strictly followed while issuing the attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C. He submits that the aforesaid proviso has not been complied with in true sense thus, rendering the order illegal.

¶9

Learned A.P.P. though tries to support the order, but submits that the orders are cryptic and subjective satisfaction has not been recorded.

¶10

After hearing the counsel for the parties and on going through the impugned orders, I find that the impugned orders are cryptic and does not suggest what was the material on which the Court was satisfied that the attachment order under Section 83 Cr. P.C. is to be issued alongwith the order of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. In absence of any reason and satisfaction, the orders impugned is rendered bad in law.

¶11

Thus, I am inclined to allow this criminal miscellaneous petition. Accordingly, the same is hereby allowed. The impugned orders dated 20.11.2017 & 11.01.2018, by which processes under Sections 82 & 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been issued, are hereby set aside. The matter is remitted to the court below to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶12

This criminal miscellaneous petition stands allowed.

¶13

( Ananda Sen, J )

¶14

Mukund/-cp.3

Anil Kherwar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kherwar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sh Yashpal Khetarpal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Indra Deo Prasad Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shailendra Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arati Sahay Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanichar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Naresh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand