Ravi Basak @ Rabi Basak v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Outcome
Disposed of
miscellaneous petition stands disposed of
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned court on or before 07.03.2022. If the petitioners appear on or before such date, the impugned order dated 09.11.2021 whereby process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners, shall not be…
- Para 1010. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. Satyarthi/ (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Judgment
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioners For the State --------- : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P. 02/Dated: 16/02/2022 Heard Mr. Gautam Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the State.
This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
The present petition has been filed for quashing of order dated
09.11.2021 whereby process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 303 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 1191 of 2018, pending in the Court of learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal.
Mr. Gautam Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that observation made in para 22 and 23 of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of “Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Ors. Vs. The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712 has not been followed in passing impugned order dated 09.11.2021. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have compromised the case.
Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the State submits that there is no illegality in the impugned order. 2
The Court has perused the impugned order dated 09.11.2021. This order is well-reasoned order. The Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. However, in the interest of justice it will be suffice if the petitioners be directed to appear in the Court below on the date fixed by this Court.
Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to appear before the concerned court on or before 07.03.2022. If the petitioners appear on or before such date, the impugned order dated 09.11.2021 whereby process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners, shall not be given effect to.
If the petitioners do not appear on or before the aforesaid date, the concerned court shall take all coercive measures against the petitioner.
If the petitioners file any petition, the same shall be considered and disposed of by the concerned Court on the same day.
Operative part
With the aforesaid observation and direction, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. Satyarthi/ (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: miscellaneous petition stands disposed of
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 82.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.