( 2025:JHHC:21545 ) 1 Cr. M.P. No.1784 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.1784 of 2025 ------ Mangal Deo Minz @ Mangal Minz, aged about 67 years, son of Late Chanku Minz, resident of Sindwar Toli, Near Asha Shree Garden, Morabadi, P.O. & P.S.-Bariatu, District-Ranchi (Jharkhand). … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Ankit Apurva, Advocate : Md. Amanat Khan, Advocate : Ms. Aulia Begum, Advocate : Md. Azam, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P. ------ 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.S.S. with several prayers, but at the outset, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not press the prayers to quash the orders dated 13.01.2023 and 31.05.2023, but confines his prayer only to quash the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code whereby the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure inter alia against the petitioner. ( 2025:JHHC:21545 ) 2 Cr. M.P. No.1784 of 2025 Accordingly, the prayers to quash the orders dated 13.01.2023 and 31.05.2023, passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 are rejected as not pressed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued vide order dated 18.06.2024 without following the due process of law and without recording the satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest which is a sine qua non for issuing proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., that too without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner, who is the accused person of the said case. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code whereby and where the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be allowed. 4. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code whereby and where the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at ( 2025:JHHC:21545 ) 3 Cr. M.P. No.1784 of 2025 Chaibasa has issued proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and submits that the very fact that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. itself shows that there were materials available in the record for the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such proclamation. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 5. 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 of 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 Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has neither recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest nor fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioner, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has committed illegality by issuing the said proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not ( 2025:JHHC:21545 ) 4 Cr. M.P. No.1784 of 2025 sustainable in law and the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law and this is a fit case where the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code whereby and where the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only. 6. Accordingly, the order dated 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code whereby and where the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only. 7. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 8. 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 04th of August, 2025 AFR/ Abhiraj