(2025:JHHC:23399) 1 Cr. M.P. No.666 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.666 of 2020 ------ 1. Naved Khan aged about 40 years, son of Afsar Khan 2. Majeed Akhtar aged about 38 years, son of Shah Mohammad Akhtar Both resident of village-Jawahar Nagar, P.O. & P.S.-Mango, Dist.- East Singhbhum … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shree Prakash Jha, Addl. 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 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code, with the prayer to quash the orders dated 27.08.2010 and 10.06.2011 passed in Sakchi P.S. Case No.83 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.827 of 2008 by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though the petitioners have also prayed to quash the order dated 22.12.2010 but the petitioners do not press the prayer to quash the said order. Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 22.12.2010 is rejected is not praised. 4. The brief fact of the case is that on 27.08.2010 the petitioners being accused persons of the said case were absent. Though the execution report of the warrant of arrest was not received, still the learned Chief Judicial (2025:JHHC:23399) 2 Cr. M.P. No.666 of 2020 Magistrate, Jamshedpur directed for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C against the petitioners without recording any satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest and on 10.06.2011 in the said case petitioners along with the accused person of the case did not appear even after issuance of processes, hence the trial court declared the petitioners as absconder. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur issued permanent warrant of arrest and put the case for evidence under Section 299 Cr.P.C. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that vide order dated 27.08.2010 in the said case the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C has been issued without following the due process of law and without recording the satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest; which is a sine qua non for issuing proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. It is then submitted that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C has been issued, without mentioning any time or place for appearance of the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the said order dated 27.08.2010 being not in accordance with law be quashed and set aside. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that so far as the order dated 10.06.2011 is concerned, the condition precedent for declaring a person absconder and issuing permanent warrant of arrest is that, it must be proved before the court concerned, that the accused has absconded and there is no immediate prospect of arresting him but in this case, there being no material in the record to suggest that there is no immediate prospect for arresting the petitioners, who are the accused persons of the case concerned, the learned (2025:JHHC:23399) 3 Cr. M.P. No.666 of 2020 Magistrate committed a grave illegality in declaring them absconder and issuing permanent warrant of arrest. Hence, it is submitted that the order dated 10.06.2011 passed in the said case by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur is not sustainable in law, therefore, the same be is also liable to be quashed and set aside. 5. On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the said orders and submits that very fact that the learned Magistrate, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and passed the order declaring the petitioners to be absconder itself shows that there were materials available in the record for the learned Judicial Magistrate to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of proclamation and declaring the petitioners, who are the accused persons of the case concerned, to be absconders. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit, be dismissed. 6. Having heard the submissions made in the bar and after going through materials available on the records, 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 Cr.P.C. must record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under Section 82 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 petitioner in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C is issued. As already indicated above since the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur (2025:JHHC:23399) 4 Cr. M.P. No.666 of 2020 has neither recorded its satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest nor fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioners, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur has committed grave illegality by issuing proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not sustainable in law and the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 27.08.2010 in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No.83 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.827 of 2008 passed by learned C.J.M. Jamshedpur be quashed and set aside. 7. Accordingly, the order dated 27.08.2010 passed in Sakchi P.S. Case no.83 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.827 of 2008 by the learned Chief judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur is quashed and set aside. 8. So far as the order dated 10.06.2011 is concerned, it is settled principle of law that before exercising the power under Section 299 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is necessary that all conditions prescribed must be strictly complied with namely the court must be satisfied that the accused has absconded or that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Nirmal Singh vs. State of Haryana, reported in (2000) 4 SCC 41. 9. Now coming to the facts of the case, the perusal of the record reveals that there is absolutely no material in the record to suggest that the petitioners have absconded or that there is no immediate prospect of arresting them. In the absence of that, certainly the learned Judicial (2025:JHHC:23399) 5 Cr. M.P. No.666 of 2020 Magistrate, Jamshedpur has committed a grave illegality by declaring the petitioners to be absconder and issuing permanent warrant of arrest against them. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the said order dated 10.06.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No. 83 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 827 of 2008 being not sustainable in law be quashed and set aside. 10. Accordingly, the order dated 10.06.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in connection with Sakchi P.S. Case No. 83 of 2008, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 827 of 2008 is quashed and set aside. 11. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur or its successor court may pass fresh order in accordance with law. 12. This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent only. 13. In view of disposal of this Cr.M.P., the interim relief granted earlier vide order dated 05.03.2020, is vacated. 14. Registry is directed to intimate the court concerned forthwith. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 12th of August, 2025 AFR/ Rohit