[2026:JHHC:21931] 1 Cr. M.P. No.2204 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.2204 of 2026 ------ 1. Harsh Raj, aged about 28 years, Son of Nitya Nand Singh, Resident of Saketpuri, P.O.- Hazaribag, P.S.- Korrah, District- Hazaribag, State-Jharkhand. 2. Manisha Singh, aged about 51 years, wife of Nitya Nand Singh, Resident of Saketpuri, P.O.-Hazaribag, P.S.- Korrah, District- Hazaribag, State Jharkhand. 3. Ankita Singh, aged about 43 years, wife of Akshay Kumar Singh, Resident of Sector 5, VTC: Gurgaon, P.O.-Gurgaon, P.S. Sector 5, District- Gurgaon, State Haryana. … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Manoj Kr. Mishra, 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 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash the order dated 26.09.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh and the order dated 21.02.2026 passed by learned A.C.J.M, Hazaribagh whereby and whereunder respectively, the bailable warrant of arrest and non-bailable warrant of arrest has been ordered to be issued against the petitioners in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No. 51 of [2026:JHHC:21931] 2 Cr. M.P. No.2204 of 2026 2018 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 504, 506 read with section 34 of the I.P.C. 3. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners were on police bail and after submission of charge-sheet and without service of summons issued upon them vide order dated 26.09.2024, bailable warrant of arrest was issued against them and without execution report of the bailable warrant of arrest issued against them, vide order dated 21.02.2026 in the said case, Non-Bailable Warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued against them. Learned counsel for the petitioners relying upon the judgment of this Court vide judgment dated 15.05.2024 in the Case of Vishal Kumar versus State of Jharkhand & Another in Cr.M.P. No. 1422 of 2024, submits that therein this Court has held that the Magistrate ought not have issued bailable warrant of arrest without any material to suggest that the summons issued to the accused person concerned has been served upon him. Similarly, without the execution report of the bailable warrant of arrest, the non-bailable warrant of arrest ought not have been issued. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to appear before the court concerned on or before 31.08.2026. Hence, the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P., be allowed. 4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer and submits that the bailable warrant of arrest and non-bailable warrant of arrest have rightly been issued by the court concerned. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit be dismissed. [2026:JHHC:21931] 3 Cr. M.P. No.2204 of 2026 5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that so far as the order dated 26.09.2024 passed in the said case is concerned, it is evident from the record that the service report of the summons issued to the petitioners, who were on bail during the investigation of the case, has not been received. So, in the absence of any material to suggest that summons issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned itself having not been served upon any of the petitioners, certainly, the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned committed a grave illegality by issuing the bailable warrant of arrest. Accordingly, the order dated 26.09.2024 being not sustainable in law, the same is quashed and set aside. 6. So far as the order dated 21.02.2026 passed in the said case is concerned, it is evident that without the execution report of bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners, the Non-Bailable warrant of arrest was issued against them, which is not sustainable in law because it is a settled principle of law that the learned Magistrate having once issued the bailable warrant of arrest ought to have ensured that execution report of such bailable warrant is received before taking any coercive steps by issuing non-bailable warrant of arrest. Hence, the said order dated 21.02.2026 is also not sustainable in law. Accordingly, the same is also quashed and set aside. 7. Since the petitioners are ready to appear before the court concerned on or before 31.08.2026, they are directed to do so, failing which learned [2026:JHHC:21931] 4 Cr. M.P. No.2204 of 2026 Judicial Magistrate may take all coercive steps for their apprehension for facing the trial. 8. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi. Dated the 23rd July, 2026 AFR/ Amar Uploaded on-29/07/2026