[ 2025:JHHC:27091] 1 Cr.M.P. No. 2524 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 2524 of 2020 1. Md. Asaraf Alam, aged about 28 years, son of Abdul Karim Ansari, resident of village- Gajrajganj, P.O.- Gajrajganj, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar. 2. Aslam Warsi @ Aslam Alam, aged about 26 years, son of Abdul Karim Ansari, resident of Gajrajganj, Nawa Nagar, P.O.- Gajrajganj, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar. 3. Abbas Warsi @ Abbas Alam, aged about 24 years, son of Abdul Karim Ansari, resident of village Gajrajganj, Mahuli Buzurg, P.O. Gajrajganj, P.S.- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar. 4. Parveen Bano @ Parveen Khatoon, aged about 35 years, wife of Md. Ashraf Aslam, Village-Gajrajganj, Kari Sath, P.O.- Gajrajganj, P.S- Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar. ...... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Rooksar Parveen, W/o Asgar Ali, resident of Gajrajganj, P.O. Gajrajganj, P.S-Udwantnagar, District- Bhojpur, Bihar. ….. Opposite Parties For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Jain, Adv. Ms. Neha Bhardwaj, Adv. For the State : Mr. Sanat Kr. Jha, Addl. PP 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 482 of CrPC with multiple prayers but the petitioner does not press the payer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 11.12.2018 passed in connection with PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by which , prima facie case was found by learned SDJM, Jamtara for the offence punishable under Sections 406 and 498A of the IPC. Accordingly, the same is rejected as not pressed with a liberty to [ 2025:JHHC:27091] 2 Cr.M.P. No. 2524 of 2020 the petitioners to raise all the grounds regarding the said prayer before the appropriate court at appropriate stage. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners confine their prayer to quash the orders dated 30.04.2019, 16.09.2019 and 03.03.2020 passed in the said case whereby and whereunder, respectively bailable warrant of arrest, non-bailable warrant of arrest and the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that though summons were issued to the petitioners, vide order dated 17.12.2018 in connection with PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by learned SDJM, Jamtara but without receipt of the service report of the summon issued to the petitioners, learned SDJM, Jamtara vide order dated 30.04.2019 in the said case, has directed for issuance of bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners and on 16.09.2019, without any execution report of the bailable warrant issued, issued the non-bailable warrant of arrest and on 03.03.2020, without recording any satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest and without fixing any time or place for appearance, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC, hence, it is submitted that the said three orders dated 30.04.2019, 16.09.2019 and 03.03.2020 passed by learned SDJM, Jamtara in connection with PCR case no. 146 of 2018 being not in accordance with law, the same be quashed and set aside. 4. Learned Addl. PP vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that the very fact that the learned SDJM, Jamtara has issued the bailable warrant of arrest, non-bailable warrant of arrest and the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. itself shows that there were sufficient materials available in the record for issuing the same. Hence, 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 materials available in the record, so far as the order dated 30.04.2019 is concerned, since learned Magistrate has issued [ 2025:JHHC:27091] 3 Cr.M.P. No. 2524 of 2020 summons to the petitioners, so it was incumbent upon the trial court to ensure that the service report of the summons is returned before issuing the bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners but having not done so, in the considered opinion of this Court, the order dated 30.04.2019 passed in PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by learned SDJM, Jamtara, is not sustainable in law, hence, the same is quashed and set aside. 6. So far as the order dated 16.09.2019 is concerned, it is a settled principle of law that Section 73 of CrPC, empowers inter alia the Judicial Magistrate of First class, to direct warrant to any person within its jurisdiction, inter alia if such person is accused of committing non-bailable offence and evading his arrest. Now coming to the order dated 16.09.2019, though it has not been specifically mentioned in the said order but the petitioners are accused of committing offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498A of IPC but there is no material in the record to show that learned SDJM, Jamtara has recorded its satisfaction that the petitioners are evading their arrest and in the absence of such satisfaction on the part of learned SDJM, certainly the order dated 16.09.2019 passed in PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by learned SDJM, Jamtara, directing the issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner is not sustainable in law, hence, the same is quashed and set aside. 7. So far as the order dated 03.03.2020 passed in PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by learned SDJM, Jamtara, is concerned, 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 accused persons in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated above since the learned SDJM, Jamtara has neither [ 2025:JHHC:27091] 4 Cr.M.P. No. 2524 of 2020 recorded its satisfaction that the petitioners are 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 SDJM, Jamtara has committed illegality by issuing the said proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. Accordingly, the order dated 03.03.2020 passed in PCR case no. 146 of 2018 by learned SDJM, Jamtara, is quashed and set aside being not sustainable in law. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioner, at this stage, submits that the petitioners undertake to appear before the court of SDJM, Jamtara, in connection with PCR case no. 146 of 2018 within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the judgment. 9. In case, the petitioners do not appear before learned SDJM, Jamtara or its successor court, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment in connection with PCR case no. 146 of 2018, learned SDJM, Jamtara or its successor court is directed to take all coercive steps for apprehension of the petitioners by passing fresh orders. 10. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent only. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated, the 2nd September, 2025 Smita /AFR