Ashutosh Tiwary v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC10 Jun 2026Cr.M.P./1587/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Quashing of process issued under Section 82 Cr.P.C. after repeal of Cr.P.C. 1973 by B.N.S.S. 2023; FIR dated 12.02.2026; Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026; impugned order dated 30.04.2026 of Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad quashed and set aside; fresh order permitted; NBW order dated 13.03.2026 not pressed; Section 528 B.N.S.S. petition; State's plea to treat order as under Section 84 B.N.S.S.; Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.; decided 10.06.2026; [2026:JHHC:16726].

What did the court decide?

Cr.M.P. allowed to the aforesaid extent: the order dated 30.04.2026 of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is quashed and set aside; the Magistrate may pass a fresh order in accordance with law; the prayer to quash the NBW order dated 13.03.2026 stands rejected as not pressed.

Ashutosh Tiwary Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether the prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 by which a Non-Bailable Warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner should be allowed. +1 more

¶¶11

Court's answer

The prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 (issuing Non-Bailable Warrant of arrest) is rejected as not pressed.

¶¶12

Ratio / Principle

Since the F.I.R. was registered on 12.02.2026, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad ought not have exercised the power under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. while passing the impugned order dated 30.04.2026.

¶¶19

Key takeaways

The order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is not sustainable in law and is liable to be quashed and set aside.ratio¶¶20
The order dated 30.04.2026 of the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is quashed and set aside.ratio¶¶21

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Miscellaneous Petition under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 — quashing — order dated 30.04.2026 of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad issuing process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. in Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 — F.I.R. registered on 12.02.2026, i.e., after the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 stood repealed by Section 531 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 — Magistrate ought not to have exercised power under Section 82 Cr.P.C. — impugned order not sustainable in law, quashed and set aside — Magistrate may pass a fresh order in accordance with law — prayer to quash Non-Bailable Warrant order dated 13.03.2026 rejected as not pressed — Cr.M.P. allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.; decided 10.06.2026.)

¶1

[2026:JHHC:16726]

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1587 of 2026

¶3

------

¶4

Ashutosh Tiwary, Aged about 25 years, S/O- Bishwajit Tiwari, R/O-SSQ-93, Sijua Colony, Sijua, P.O.- Sijua, P.S.- Jogta, DistDhanbad. … Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

… The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate. Mr. Deepak Sahu, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.

¶7

------

¶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 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 inter alia with twin prayers but at the outset it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not press the prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 by which Non-Bailable Warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner.

¶12

Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 is rejected as not pressed.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner confines his prayer to quash the order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dhanbad has issued process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. Though the said provision has been repealed by Section 531 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and the case was instituted in the year 2026 when the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was no more in

¶14

¶15

Cr. M.P. No.1587 of 2026

¶16

[2026:JHHC:16726]

¶17

force. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P. be allowed.

¶18

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that the impugned order be treated as having been passed under Section 84 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit be dismissed.

¶19

6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court has no hesitation in holding that since the F.I.R. was registered on 12.02.2026. Hence, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dhanbad ought not have exercised the power under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. while passing the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026.

¶20

7. Accordingly, the said order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is not sustainable in law, hence the same is liable to be quashed and set aside.

¶21

8. Accordingly, the said order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is quashed and set aside.

¶22

9. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Dhanbad may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

¶23