( 2026:JHHC:12661 ) Cr.M.P. No.4351 of 2019 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No. 4351 of 2019 1. Prabir Gorai @ Pravir Gorain, aged about 54 years, son of Krishna Chandra Gorai. 2. Biswajit Gorai @ Bishwajit Gorain, aged about 57 years, son of Sudhir Chandra Gorai. Both residents of Suryasen Pally, North Lake Road, Purulia, P.O. & P.S. –Purulia, District –Purulia (W.B.). .... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Shri Sewa Ram Mahato, son of Shri Biswanath Mahato, resident of Village & P.O. –Tantri, P.S. –Topchanchi, District – Dhanbad. …. Opp. Parties P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ….. For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.D. Agrawal, 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 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with three fold prayers but the learned counsel for the petitioners do not press the prayer to quash the order dated 10.01.2013 by which attachment order under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued, as no property of the petitioners have been attached and confines his prayer only to quash the orders dated 07.08.2012 ( 2026:JHHC:12661 ) Cr.M.P. No.4351 of 2019 2 and 15.07.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection Complaint Case No.493 of 2006. 3. Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 10.01.2013, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection in connection with Complaint Case No.493 of 2006 is rejected as not pressed. 4. So far as the said order dated 07.08.2012, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued vide the said order without following the due process of law and without recording any satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest which is a sine qua non for issuing the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C and that too without fixing any time or place for appearance of the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the same be quashed and set aside. 5. So far as the order dated 15.07.2017, passed in the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the condition precedent for declaring a person permanent 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 of arresting the petitioners, the learned Magistrate has committed a grave ( 2026:JHHC:12661 ) Cr.M.P. No.4351 of 2019 3 illegality in declaring the petitioners as an absconder and issuing permanent warrant of arrest against them. Therefore, it is submitted that the said order dated 15.07.2017, passed in the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 being also not sustainable in law, the same be quashed and set aside. 6. The Special Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the orders dated 07.08.2012 and 15.07.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection in the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 and submits that the very fact that the learned Magistrate, has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and the permanent warrant of arrest under Section 299 of Cr.P.C. itself goes to show that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the learned Magistrate to be satisfied to pass the said orders. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed. 7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, so far as the said order dated 07.08.2012 is concerned, 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 the 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 accused person in the order ( 2026:JHHC:12661 ) Cr.M.P. No.4351 of 2019 4 itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated above, since the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad has neither recorded the satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest nor fixed the time and place for appearance of the petitioners- who are the accused person of the case, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the said order dated 07.08.2012, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 is not sustainable in law. 8. Accordingly, the order dated 07.08.2012, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. 9. So far as the order dated 15.07.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection in the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 is concerned, it is a 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. 10. 10. 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 ( 2026:JHHC:12661 ) Cr.M.P. No.4351 of 2019 5 prospect of arresting them. In the absence of that, certainly the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad has committed a grave illegality by declaring the petitioners to be absconders and issuing permanent warrant of arrest against them. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that said order dated 15.07.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 being not sustainable in law be quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. 11. Accordingly, the order dated 15.07.2017, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with the said Complaint Case No. 493 of 2006 is quashed and set aside qua the petitioners. 12. The learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad or its successor court may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 13. This criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent only. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 8th April, 2026 AFR/Sonu/- Uploaded 06.05.2026