Ajit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

1

Cr.M.P. No. 31 of 2024

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 31 of 2024

Ajit Kumar, aged about 30 years, son of Upendra Singh, resident of village- Makhdumpur, P.O.- Makhdumpur, P.S.Bajirganj, Dist.- Gaya, Bihar ....... Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand ........... Opp. Party

¶7

For the Petitioner : Md. Zaid Ahmed, Adv. For the State : Mr. Shailesh Kr. Sinha, Addl.PP

¶8

P R E S E N T

¶9

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

By the Court:- Heard the parties

¶11

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., though, with several prayers but the petitioner confines his prayer only to quash the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Dhanbad in connection with Dhansar P.S. case no. 279 of 2018 by which , learned JMFC, Dhanbad, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC without recording its satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself, to evade his arrest and without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner.

¶12

The brief facts of the case is that the prayer was made by the I.O. for issue of proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C, but the incharge, JMFC who has put his illegible signature and has not even mentioned his name, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C, without recording its satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself, to evade his arrest and without fixing the time and place for his appearance.

¶13

2

¶14

Cr.M.P. No. 31 of 2024

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C has been issued vide order date 05.12.2023 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 without fixing the time and place for the petitioner to appear in the court concerned. Hence, it is submitted that the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad in connection with Dhansar P.S. case no. 279 of 2018; being not in accordance with law, be quashed and set aside.

¶16

Learned Addl. P.P. for the State on the other hand, vehemently oppose the prayer for quashing the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad in connection with Dhansar P.S. case no. 279 of 2018 and submits that very fact that learned Incharge JMFC, Dhanbad, has issued the proclamation; itself shows that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such proclamation, hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition 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 In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad 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

¶18

3

¶19

Cr.M.P. No. 31 of 2024

¶20

the petitioner, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad 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 and this is a fit case where the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad in connection with Dhansar P.S. case no. 279 of 2018, be quashed and set aside.

¶21

Accordingly, the order dated 05.12.2023 passed by learned Incharge JMFC, Dhanbad in connection with Dhansar P.S. case no. 279 of 2018, is quashed and set aside and learned In-charge JMFC, Dhanbad is directed to pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶22

The court concerned may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶23

Before parting, it is pertinent to mention here that this kind of reckless orders has been passed by a Judicial Officer, and the Judicial Magistrate, In-charge, has put an illegible signature, in spite of repeated orders passed by this court; deprecating such practice. This kind of orders only enhances the burden of this Court, unnecessarily.

¶24

Let a copy of this order be sent to the learned Principal District Judge, Dhanbad with a direction to impress upon and warn the concerned Judicial Magistrate not to pass such reckless order in future.

¶25

In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.

¶26

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶27

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 17^th January, 2024 Smita /AFR

Ajit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jitendra Gupta Vs Jagannath Dutta

Lokesh Sahu Vs Agriculture Department

Hemant Kumar And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Ors.

Satyajeet Giri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhushan Bara Vs the State of Jharkhand

V S Gopal Mudaliyar Alias v S Gopal Mudaliya Vs the State of Jharkhand