(2025:JHHC:23529) 1 Cr. M.P. No.2117 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2117 of 2025 ------ Sharda Nand Dev, aged about 64 years, S/o-Late Banarshi Lal Dev, Vill & P.O. Dhamsai, P.S.-Bahera, Dist.-Darbhanga, Bihar at present resident of Sudha Niwas, Hanuman Market, Kunwar Singh Colony, Chas, P.O. & P.S.-Chas, Dist.-Bokaro … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand through Anti-Corruption Bureau … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Manoj Kumar, G.A.-VI Mr. Deepankar, AC to GA-VI ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.N.S with a prayer to quash the order dated 02.04.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.21 of 2017 whereby and whereunder the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C has been issued against the petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that though the Cr.M.P. has been filed with the twin prayers but the petitioner does not press the prayer to quash the order dated 29.05.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.21 of 2017. Hence, the said prayer is rejected as not praised. (2025:JHHC:23529) 2 Cr. M.P. No.2117 of 2025 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner confines the prayer to quash the order dated 02.04.2024 in the said case wherein and whereby the learned Special Judge, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner without following the mandatory provision of law and without fixing the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself, by which the proclamation has been directed to be issued. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P. may be allowed. 5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer and submits that, it is apparent that even though not specifically mentioned in the impugned order but the petitioner was expected to appear before the court concerned within 30 days from the date of proclamation of notice under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. Hence, it is submitted that the instant Cr.M.P. being without any merit be dismissed. 6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which issues the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. must record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under Section 82 of 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 Cr.P.C., it must mention the time and place for appearance of the accused persons in respect of the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. Now coming to the facts of the case, it is crystal clear that the learned Special Judge has failed to fix the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order by which the proclamation under (2025:JHHC:23529) 3 Cr. M.P. No.2117 of 2025 section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was directed to be issued, hence this court has no hesitation in holding that the impugned order dated 02.04.2024 has been passed without following the due process of law. Therefore, the order dated 02.04.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.21 of 2017 is not sustainable in law and continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the order dated 02.04.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.21 of 2017 be quashed and set aside. 7. Accordingly, the order dated 02.04.2024, passed by learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh in connection with A.C.B. P.S. Case No.21 of 2017, is quashed and aside. 8. The learned Special Judge, Vigilance, A.C.B. Hazaribagh may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 9. In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed to the aforesaid extent only. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 13th of August, 2025 AFR/ Rohit