( 2025:JHHC:22296 ) 1 Cr.M.P. No.1675 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 1675 of 2025 Mahendra Verma @ Mahendra Prasad Verma, S/o Bahadur Mahto, aged about 45 years, resident of Vill –Singhdih, P.O. –Koiridih, P.S. – Sariya, Dist. –Giridih. .... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. Opp. Party P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnu Prabhakar Pathak, Advocate : Ms. Apurva, Advocate For the State : Mr. Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. P.P. ….. By the Court:- 1. Heard the parties. 2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the orders dated 28.01.2019 and 31.08.2023 by which twice non-bailable warrants of arrest have been issued against the petitioner and order dated 17.09.2024 by which the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with F.C. No. 163 of 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Section 41/42 of the Indian Forest Act read with Section 9/10 of the Bihar Saw Mills (Regulation) Act and under Section 4/5/6 of the Jharkhand Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, now the case is pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih. ( 2025:JHHC:22296 ) 2 Cr.M.P. No.1675 of 2025 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that vide order dated 28.01.2019, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih though prior to that issued bailable warrant of arrest but without the execution report of the bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioner, has ordered for issuance of non- bailable warrant of arrest and again vide order dated 31.08.2023 a fresh non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued. It is next submitted that in neither the order dated 28.01.2019 nor in the order dated 31.08.2023, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih or the learned Sessions Judge -IV has recorded any satisfaction that the petitioner is evading his arrest. Hence, it is submitted that the said two orders being not sustainable in law be quashed and set aside. It is next submitted that vide order dated 17.09.2024, in the said case, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, issued the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. without recording any satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest and without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner who is the accused person of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the said order dated 17.09.2024 being not sustainable in law be quashed and set aside. 4. The learned Spl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that the very fact that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih and the learned Sessions ( 2025:JHHC:22296 ) 3 Cr.M.P. No.1675 of 2025 Judge-IV have issued the non-bailable warrants of arrest and the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., itself goes to show that there were materials available in the record for the learned courts below to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such non-bailable warrant of arrest and the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. Therefore, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 5. 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 it is a settled principle of law that a Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of First Class may direct a warrant to any person in his local jurisdiction for arrest inter-alia of a person who is accused of a non-bailable offence and is evading arrest. 6. Now coming to the facts of the case, this Court is of the considered view that since the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate or the learned Sessions Judge has not recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner is evading his arrest but still has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest vide the said orders dated 28.01.2019 and 31.08.2023, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the said orders dated 28.01.2019 and 31.08.2023 by which non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner are not sustainable in law. ( 2025:JHHC:22296 ) 4 Cr.M.P. No.1675 of 2025 7. Accordingly, the orders dated 28.01.2019 and 31.08.2019, passed in connection with F.C. No. 163 of 2011 are quashed and set aside. 8. So far as the order dated 17.09.2024, passed in the said case is concerned, it is a settled principle of law that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which issues the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. must record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. is made, is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to issue proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., it must mention the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated above, since the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has neither recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner who is the accused person of the case is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest nor fixed any time or place for appearance of the accused-petitioner, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Judicial Magistrate, Giridih has committed an illegality by issuing the said proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. without complying with the mandatory requirement of law. Hence, the said order dated 17.09.2024, passed in the said F.C. No. 163 of 2011 is also not sustainable in law and continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 17.09.2024, passed in the said F.C. No. 163 of 2011 be quashed and set aside. ( 2025:JHHC:22296 ) 5 Cr.M.P. No.1675 of 2025 9. Accordingly, the order dated 17.09.2024, passed in the said F.C. No. 163 of 2011 is quashed and set aside. 10. The learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Giridih may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 11. This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent only. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 21st July, 2025 AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-