Mukesh Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2002 of 2024

------

Mukesh Yadav S/o Bajo Mahto, aged 36 years, R/o village Chounra, P.O. Fulchi, P.S. Taratand, Phulchi, District- Giridih, Jharkhand815312 … Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Shubhashis Rasik Soren, Advocate Mr. Alok Ranjan, Advocate Ms. Shobha Gloria Lakra, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, Addl.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Krishna Prajapati, Advocate ------ P R E S E N T

¶6

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

¶8

Though this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with several prayers but the petitioner confines his prayer to quash and set aside the orders dated 07.10.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023 by which respectively the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and the attachment order of the property of the petitioner has been issued under Section 83 of Cr.P.C. and abandon the rest of the prayers.

¶9

Accordingly, the prayer for quashing the order dated 07.11.2022 and the entire criminal case of the said case including the order dated 08.09.2023 is rejected as not pressed.

¶10

The brief facts of the case is that on 07.10.2023, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih ordered for issuance of the proclamation against the

¶11

1 Cr. M.P. No.2002 of 2024

¶12

petitioner under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without recording any satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest; without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner and vide order dated 18.06.2024, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih has ordered for issuance of attachment order of the property of the petitioner under Section 83 of Cr.P.C.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued vide order dated 07.10.2023 without following the due process of law and without recording the satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest which is a sine qua non for issuing proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and that too without fixing any time or place for appearance of the petitioner; who is the accused person of the said case. It is next submitted that without mentioning any reason and without mentioning the description of the property of the petitioner to be attached, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih has ordered for issuance of attachment order of the property of the petitioner vide order dated 18.06.2024 in the said case. Hence, it is submitted that the orders dated 07.10.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023; being not in accordance with law, be quashed and set aside.

¶14

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the orders dated 07.10.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023 and submit that the very fact that the learned

¶15

2 Cr. M.P. No.2002 of 2024

¶16

Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and the order of attachment under Section 83 of Cr.P.C. itself shows that there were materials available in the record for the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such proclamation and attachment order of the property of the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

¶17

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which issues the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. must record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is made, is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to issue proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. it must mention the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated above since the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih has neither recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest nor fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioner of this criminal miscellaneous petition, who is the accused person of the said case, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih has committed illegality by issuing the said proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not sustainable in law and the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 07.10.2023 passed by the learned

¶18

3 Cr. M.P. No.2002 of 2024

¶19

Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023 be quashed and set aside.

¶20

Accordingly, the order dated 07.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023, is quashed and set aside.

¶21

So far as the order dated 18.06.2024 is concerned, it is a settled principle of law that the court issuing proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. may for reasons to be recorded in writing at any time after the issue of proclamation, order for attachment of any property movable or immovable or both belonging to the proclaimed person. Now, in the absence of any material in the record to suggest that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. was in fact made in accordance with law, certainly the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih committed illegality by passing the order dated 18.06.2024 for attachment of property of the petitioner without mentioning the description of the property to be attached and without recording any reason in writing about the need for passing such order of attachment. Hence, under such circumstances, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023 is also not in accordance with law and continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023, be quashed and set aside.

¶22

¶23

Cr. M.P. No.2002 of 2024

¶24

Accordingly, the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Giridih in connection with Taratand P.S. Case No.18 of 2020 corresponding to S.T. Case No.496 of 2023 is also quashed and set aside.

¶25