Disposed¶22

Md Nur Alam Alias Md Noor Alam v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jharkhand HC22 Jan 2024Cr.M.P./865/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.; order dated 24.11.2015; court satisfaction not recorded; statutory Form-IV not indicated; order set aside and remanded for fresh order in accordance with law; F.I.R. prayer withdrawn with liberty; Sindri P.S. Case No. 35 of 2013; G.R. No. 1953 of 2013; Judicial Magistrate Dhanbad; Cr.M.P. No. 865 of 2016; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; interim order vacated.

What did the court decide?

Prayer relating to the F.I.R. permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to take all grounds at appropriate stage; order dated 24.11.2015 (proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.) set aside; matter remitted back to the learned court to pass afresh order in accordance with law; petition disposed of, pending I.A. if any disposed of, and interim order vacated. ¶22

Md Nur Alam Alias Md Noor Alam Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr. — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶22

Issue for consideration

Whether the prayer concerning the F.I.R. may be withdrawn, with liberty to the petitioner to take all the grounds at the appropriate stage. +1 more

¶13

Court's answer

Permission is accorded to the petitioner to withdraw the prayer relating to the F.I.R., with liberty to take all the grounds at the appropriate stage.

¶14

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of the order dated 24.11.2015, the Court found that the satisfaction of the learned court had not been recorded (a parameter for passing such an order) and that the statutory Form-IV was not indicated in the order.

¶17

Key takeaways

Order dated 24.11.2015 passed in Sindri P.S. Case No. 35 of 2013 is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned court to pass afresh order in accordance with law.ratio¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Cr.M.P. No. 865 of 2016, decided 22.01.2024), arising out of Sindri P.S. Case No. 35 of 2013 / G.R. No. 1953 of 2013 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. Counsel for the petitioner withdrew the prayer concerning the F.I.R. with liberty to raise all grounds at an appropriate stage, and permission was accorded. Pressing only the order dated 24.11.2015 issuing proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against him, the petitioner contended it was not in accordance with law. Perusing that order, the Court found that the satisfaction of the learned court had not been recorded (a parameter for passing such an order) and that the statutory Form-IV was not indicated; accordingly, the order dated 24.11.2015 was set aside and the matter remitted back to the learned court to pass afresh order in accordance with law. Petition disposed of; pending I.A. disposed of; interim order vacated.

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶3

Cr.M.P. No. 865 of 2016

¶4

Md. Nur Alam @ Md. Noor Alam

¶5

…….Petitioner Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand & Anr.

¶7

…… Opp. Parties ……..

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶9

---------

¶10

For the Petitioner: Mr A.K. Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl. P.P.

¶11

03/Dated: 22/01/2024

¶12

The matter relates to Sindri P.S. Case No. 35 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1953 of 2013, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.

¶13

Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submits that so far F.I.R. is concerned, he is not pressing that prayer. He seeks permission to withdraw that prayer with liberty to take all the grounds at appropriate stage.

¶14

Permission is accorded.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he is pressing only order dated 24.11.2015 whereby proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner. He submits that the said order is not in accordance with law.

¶16

Learned counsel for the State submits that the petitioner is not appearing before the learned court that is why the said order has been passed.

¶17

The Court perused the order dated 24.11.2015 and finds that satisfaction of the learned court has not been recorded which is one of the parameter in passing such order and even Form-IV which is statutory is not indicated in order dated 24.11.2015.

¶18