Asha Devi @ Anupa Kumari v. The State of Jharkhand

:Mr. Anurag Kashyap , Adv. :Mr. Shiv Shankar Kumar , Addl. PP. P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties.

This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. case no. 275 of 2021 (S) whereby and whereunder, the proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC has been issued against the petitioners by learned JMFC, Giridih.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were innocent and they were not evading the process of law rather they preferred the anticipatory bail, hence, it is submitted that the order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. case no. 275 of 2021 (S) be quashed and set aside.

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. case no. 275 of 2021 (S) and submits that there is no illegality in the said order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Giridih, hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition, being without any merit be dismissed. 2 Cr.M.P. No. 510 of 2024

Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that on 04.08.2023, the I.O. of the case submitted a petition along with the execution report of the non-bailable warrant of arrest, issued against the petitioners, who are accused persons of the said case, along with the part of the case diary. Learned JMFC, Giridih on the basis of the materials available in the record, found that on three occasions, when police raided the house of the petitioners, the details of which, has been mentioned in the order concerned, the petitioners, who are accused of that case, were found absent from their residential house and from the materials thus available, learned JMFC, Giridih was satisfied that the petitioners are evading their arrest and fixed the time and place for the appearance of the petitioners before the court and ordered for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC, hence, this Court do not find any illegality in the said order.

Further, by now it is a settled principle of law, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Srikant Upadhyay & Others Versus State of Bihar & Anr. reported in 2024 0 Supreme(SC) 226, that filing of anticipatory bail, does not amount to appearance before the trial court, and hence, filing of anticipatory bail, will not be a bar for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC, para 23 of which reads as under:

23. Xxxxxxxxxxxx Pending the application for anticipatory bail, in the absence of an interim protection, if a police officer can arrest the accused concerned how can it be contented that the court which issued summons on account of non-obedience to comply with its order for appearance and then issuing warrant of arrest cannot proceed further in terms of the provisions under Section 82, Cr.PC, merely because of the pendency of an application for anticipatory bail. If the said position is accepted the same would be adopted as a ruse to escape from the impact and consequences of issuance of warrant for arrest and also from the issuance of proclamation under Section 82, Cr.PC, by filing successive applications for anticipatory bail. In such circumstances, and in the absence of any statutory prohibition and further, taking note of the position of law which enables a police officer to arrest the applicant for anticipatory bail if pending an application for anticipatory bail the matter is adjourned but no interim order was passed. We have no hesitation to answer the question posed for consideration in the negative. In other words, it is made clear that in the absence of any interim order, pendency of an application for anticipatory bail shall not bar the Trial Court in issuing/proceeding with steps for proclamation and in taking steps under Section 83, Cr.PC, in accordance with law.

(Emphasis supplied) 3 Cr.M.P. No. 510 of 2024

Considering the aforesaid facts, this Court is of the considered view that there is no illegality in the order dated 04.08.2023 passed by learned JMFC, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. case no. 275 of 2021 (S), hence, it does not warrant the interference of this Court in the said order, in exercise of the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of CrPC.

Hence, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit is dismissed. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 20th March, 2024 Smita /AFR (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)