Kasim Ansari Alias Kasim Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kr. Tiwari, Spl.P.P. ------ P R E S E N T

¶13

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶14

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

¶15

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 22.03.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No.29 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case no.921 of 2023.

¶16

¶17

Cr. M.P. No.2436 of 2025

¶18

( 2025:JHHC:26407 )

¶19

The brief facts of the case is that on 22.03.2025, a Surrender-cumBail petition was filed by the petitioners along with co-accused persons in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa, but as no one turns up on behalf of the accused persons when the case was called out, the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa rejected the Surrendercum-Bail Petition.

¶20

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the police have filed supplementary charge sheet against the petitioners and the cognizance has been taken by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa. It is next submitted that in the light of the order dated 01.12.2023 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Special Leave Petition (Cr.) No.11543 of 2023, the petitioners filed the petition dated 22.03.2025 before the learned court below and sought permission to surrender and execute bail bond, but the same was rejected.

¶21

It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to submit undertaking and are ready to follow the conditions as may be imposed for their appearance. It is then submitted that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 11.09.2023 in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No.30359 of 2023 passed order that in the meantime, the petitioners be not arrested but shall cooperate with the investigation and vide order dated 01.12.2023 in Criminal Appeal No.3656 of 2023 arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.11543 of 2023 made the order dated 11.09.2023 final in the matter. It is lastly submitted that the prayer, as prayed for in the instant Cr.M.P, be allowed.

¶22

¶23

Cr. M.P. No.2436 of 2025

¶24

( 2025:JHHC:26407 )

¶25

Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioners made in the instant Cr.M.P and submits that it is the cardinal principle of criminal law that accused in criminal case has to go to the criminal court physically and it is apparent from the order dated 22.03.2025, that the petitioners did not appear before the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa physically, when the case was called out, so rightly the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa has rejected the Surrender-cum-Bail Petition because of the failure on the part of the petitioners to appear physically before the Court below. Therefore, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

¶26

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 it is a requirement of law that an accused person of a criminal case must appear physically before the Court concerned unless and until his physical appearance is dispensed with, by the express order of any Court of law, including the court concerned, in which such accused has to appear. The perusal of the record reveals that there is no such judicial order passed by any competent court of law dispensing with the personal appearance of the petitioners before the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa in whose court Dandai P.S. Case No.29 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case no.921 of 2023, of which case the petitioners are the accused persons.

¶27

¶28

Cr. M.P. No.2436 of 2025

¶29

( 2025:JHHC:26407 )

¶30

Under such circumstances, this Court do not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 22.03.2025 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa has rejected the Surrender-cum-Bail Petition of the petitioners consequent upon their failure to appear before it physically when the case was called out.

¶31

Accordingly, this court do not find any justifiable reason to interfere with the order dated 22.03.2025 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate-1^st Class, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No.29 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case no.921 of 2023.

¶32

Thus, this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, is dismissed.

¶33

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶34

High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 01^st of September, 2025 AFR/ Abhiraj

¶35

¶36

Cr. M.P. No.2436 of 2025

Kasim Ansari Alias Kasim Sheikh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kasim Ansari Alias Kasim Sheikh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Aditya Sekhar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rita Marandi Vs Lalita Alias Latika Baraik

Santosh Prajapati Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manish Jain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Meena Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jatin Sahay Vs the State of Jharkhand