The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 3377 of 2024 1. Ravindra Kumar Mahto @ Ravindra Mahto, aged about 26 years, Son of Late Nand Kishor Mahto, resident of Village –Babhaniya, P.O. –Mordiha, P.S. –Thakurgangti, District –Godda, (Jharkhand). 2. Subodh Yadav, aged about 53 years, Son of Khokha Yadav, resident of Village –Baniyadih, P.O. –Baniyadih, P.S. –Thakurgangti, District –Godda, (Jharkhand). 3. Ranjan Kumar @ Ranjan Singh @ Kumar Ranjan, aged about 52 years, Son of Late Virendra Kumar Singh, Resident of Village – Barahat Behind Petrol Pump, P.O.+P.S. –Mehrama, District –Godda, Jharkhand, PIN Code -813208. The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party Versus .... Petitioners P R E S E N T
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner For the State : Vishal Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Sameer Saurabh, Advocate : Mr. Manoj Kumar, G.A.-III : Mr. Aditya Raman, AC to G.A.-III ….. By the Court:- 1. 2. Heard the parties. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 19.09.2023 by which non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioners and also the order 19.12.2023 by which the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioners by the learned 1 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024 Special Judge, SC/ST Act Cases, Godda in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 corresponding to S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020. 3. The brief fact of the case is that on 19.09.2023, the application dated 23.08.2023 submitted by the I.O. of the case was moved. The petitioners are the named accused persons of S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020. Because of the absence of the accused persons, delay was occurring on the part of the I.O. for submitting charge sheet, hence the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda allowed the prayer to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners who are accused persons of the said S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020. Perusal of the record further reveals that on 19.12.2023, the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda has observed that the petitioners are absconding from their house, hence ordered for issuance of the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C against the petitioners. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda in a mechanical manner issued the warrant of arrest without any satisfaction that the petitioners are evading their arrest. It is next submitted that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued vide order dated 19.12.2023 without following the due process of law and without fixing any time and place for their appearance, which is a sine-qua-non for issuing the 2 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024 proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that the said order is an illegal one. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for by the petitioners in this criminal miscellaneous petition be allowed. 5. The learned counsel for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that the very fact that the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda has directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest and subsequently the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. itself goes to show that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of the non-bailable warrant of arrest and the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 6. 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 Section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vests the power inter-alia upon the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Magistrate of 1st Class to direct warrant of arrest to any person within the local jurisdiction for arrest inter-alia of any person who is accused of non-bailable offence and is evading his arrest. 3 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024 7. Now coming to the order dated 19.09.2023 though it has not been specifically mentioned in the said order itself about the petitioner being accused of having committed any non-bailable offence but perusal of the record reveals that the petitioners are the accused of committing the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 as well as Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code which are non-bailable offences but there is no recording of any satisfaction by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda that the petitioners are evading their arrest and there is no material in the record to suggest that the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda was satisfied that the petitioners were evading their arrest. Therefore, the order dated 19.09.2023, without any recording of satisfaction by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda that the petitioners are evading their arrest but still passing orders for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against them, has been passed mechanically without application of mind and the same is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, the order dated 19.09.2023 passed in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 corresponding to S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020 by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda is quashed and set aside. 4 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024 8. So far as the order dated 19.12.2023 passed in the said case is concerned, it is pertinent to mention here that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which decides to issue proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., must mention the time and place for appearance of the accused persons of the case in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated above since the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda has not fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioners who are the accused persons of the case but still passed orders for issuance of the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., hence this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda has committed illegality by passing the order for issuance of the said proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the said order dated 19.12.2023 passed in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 corresponding to S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020 by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda is not in accordance with law and continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 19.12.2023 passed in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 corresponding to S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020 by the learned 5 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024 Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda be quashed and set aside. 9. Accordingly, the order dated 19.12.2023 passed in connection with Thakurgangti P.S. Case No. 18 of 2020 corresponding to S.C./S.T. Case No. 21 of 2020 by the learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda is quashed and set aside. The learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act Cases, Godda may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Decision
In the result this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. 10. 11. High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 18th December, 2024 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/- (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) 6 Cr.M.P. No.3377 of 2024