(2026:JHHC:18177) 1 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. M. P. No. 1761 of 2026 Satpal Singh @ Soni Singh, aged about 30 years, s/o Hardip Singh, resident of H. No. 17, B – Block, Anand Nagar, near Nari Sakti Kendra, Jamshedpur, PO – Golmuri, PS – Golmuri, District- Eat Singhbhum, Jharkhand. … … …Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand. … … …Opp. Party ------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate : Ms. Rashika Bajaj, Advocate : Mr. Rishav Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Ajay Kr. Sah, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P. ------ PRESENT 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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, with the prayer to quash the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate – 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate has directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest and further to quash the order dated 21.04.2026 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in connection with the said Govindpur P.S. Case (2026:JHHC:18177) 2 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 No. 53 of 2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate has issued process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. 3. The brief fact of this case is that the petitioner is an accused of Govindpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 involving the offences punishable under Sections 302 /34 /120B of the Indian Penal Code along with Section 27 of the Arms Act. On 19.06.2025, police submitted a requisition along with case diary and from the case diary, the learned Judicial Magistrate – 1st Class, Jamshedpur, was satisfied that the petitioner is an accused of committing non-bailable offences and is evading his arrest and on being so satisfied, directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant against the petitioner. On 21.04.2026, the I.O. of the case filed a requisition through the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor along with a copy of the case diary and the execution report of the non-bailable warrant. From the same, the learned Magistrate was satisfied that the petitioner is absconding due to fear of arrest and he is evading his arrest and being so satisfied, directed for issuance of the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. and also directed the I.O. to make the proclamation by affixing the said proclamation in conspicuous place of the village, part of court- house, conspicuous place of the town and besides the same, publish the same in the newspaper on 15.05.2026. In the said order, it was also directed that during affixing of proclamation, photograph shall be clicked and the case was fixed to 25.05.2026 for the petitioner to appear before the Court concerned. (2026:JHHC:18177) 3 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner is false and the petitioner is not evading his arrest rather he is only attempting to safeguard his liberty by filing anticipatory bail application. The process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner without complying with the mandatory requirements of law. It is next submitted that it is the requirement of law that the specified time for the appearance of the accused, when a proclamation under section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, shall not be less than 30 days from the date of publication of the proclamation. It is next submitted that the proclamation has also been directed to be published on 15.05.2026 in the newspaper. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P., be allowed. 5. Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner and submits that there is absolutely no illegality in the order dated 19.06.2025 and the petitioner is also satisfied about the same, hence, the petitioner did not dare to whisper even a single word showing any shortcomings in the order dated 19.06.2025. Hence, there is absolutely no merit in the prayer to quash the order dated 19.06.2025 passed in the said case; as the undisputed fact remains that the petitioner was accused inter alia of committing the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, both of which offences are non-bailable offences and he was evading arrest. (2026:JHHC:18177) 4 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 6. So far as the order dated 21.04.2026 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned Addl. P.P. that for proclamation to be made under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C.; publishing the same in the newspaper is not a sine qua non. In the impugned order dated 21.04.2026, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has categorically mentioned mode of proclamation by affixing the same in conspicuous parts of various places as mentioned in the order itself. But additionally, it has been directed that the same be published in the daily newspaper on 15.05.2026 and the date for appearance of the petitioner was on 25.05.2026. Since the order was passed on 21.04.2026, so if the proclamation has been made at places mentioned therein before 25.04.2026, the fixing of date on 25.05.2026 of appearance of the petitioner before the Court concerned, does not involve in any illegality. Hence, the additional direction of publishing the notice in the daily newspaper, cannot be termed to be illegal. Therefore, it is submitted that there is no illegality in the order dated 21.04.2026 as well passed in the said Govindpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 (supplementary). It is lastly submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit, be dismissed. 7. Having heard the submissions made at the bar and after going through the materials available on record, so far as the order dated 19.06.2025 is concerned, as has rightly been submitted by the learned Addl. P.P., there is absolutely no averment made in respect of the said order in the entire Criminal Miscellaneous Petition as to why the same (2026:JHHC:18177) 5 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 may be quashed except for making a prayer for the same. The perusal of the record reveals that the undisputed fact remains that the petitioner is involved in the commission of non-bailable offence inter alia punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. Learned Judicial Magistrate – 1st Class, Jamshedpur, was satisfied from the materials available on record that the petitioner is evading his arrest though he is involved in commission of non-bailable offences. On being thus satisfied, the learned Judicial Magistrate has directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest vide order dated 19.06.2025 in the said Govindpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 (supplementary). Thus, this Court do not find any illegality in the said order. Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 19.06.2025, is dismissed. 8. So far as the order dated 21.04.2026 is concerned, in the said order the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, has in no uncertain manner taken note of the three dates in which Police raided the house of the petitioner in the presence of two witnesses each and he was found absent. On being thus satisfied that the petitioner is absconding for the fear of arrest, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has directed for issue of proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. In the order itself, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has specified the mode of proclamation by affixing the same in different places as already indicated in the foregoing paragraphs of the judgment and categorically mentioned in the said order. (2026:JHHC:18177) 6 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 9. Additionally, so far as the direction by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate that the same be published in the daily newspaper on 15.05.2026 is concerned, it is needless to mention that the publication of the proclamation in a daily newspaper is not a sine qua non for a valid proclamation to be made under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. The same can be made by other modes also as has been mentioned in the impugned order itself by affixing the same in conspicuous part of the different places as already indicated above. So, in case the proclamation has been made in the said mode except publishing the proclamation in the newspaper before 25.04.2026, then the same will be valid proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. So, in the considered opinion of this court, the impugned order dated 21.04.2026, does not suffer from any illegality either. 10. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that since the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, has ordered for publication of the proclamation additionally in a newspaper in a date subsequent to the proclamation being made in other modes, the same cannot be termed as an illegality, warranting interference of this court in exercise of its power under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. 11. Accordingly, this Court do not find any illegality in the order dated 21.04.2026 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Jamshedpur, in Govindpur P.S. Case No. 53 of 2023 (supplementary) warranting interference of this Court in exercise of its power under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S. (2026:JHHC:18177) 7 Cr.M.P. No. 1761 of 2026 12. Accordingly, this Cr. M.P. being without any merit, is dismissed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 22nd June, 2026 AFR/ Aditi Uploaded On - 25/06/2026