2026:JHHC:26147 1. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.1441 of 2023 -------- Karamjit Kumar Singh @ Mantu Singh, aged about 29 years, son of late Shiv Nandan Singh, resident of Village- Pathra, PO and PS Imamganj, District-Gaya (Bihar). … ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Anup Kumar Sinha, aged about 38 years, son of late Sri Girendra Prasad, resident of Anru Garuwa, PO +PS- Hunterganj, District: Chatra. … … Opposite Parties -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA For the Petitioner : Mr. Anand Kumar Sinha, Advocate; Mr. Abhishek Sharan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Spl.P.P. For the O.P.No.2 : Mr. Vijay Shankar Jha, Advocate -------- Order No.13/Dated: 31st August, 2026 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The present revision application has been filed against the order dated 18.4.2023 by which discharge petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 05 of 2023, arising out of Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 62 of 2013, registered for the offence under Sections 364 (A)/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 17(i)(ii) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. 3. The case of prosecution as per informant, namely, Anup Kumar Sinha is that on 13.6.2013 at about 09:00 p.m. he was at Shyamakant Singh Stone Crusher and at the same time three persons arrived in a tempo who were holding rifle and on the point of rifle they took away the informant along with one Amit Kumar Sinha and Satyendra Singh and after reaching about 7 k.m. the said tempo became breakdown and due to which they took away them to Dalkoma Pahar on foot. It is further alleged that thereafter the accused person took mobile number of his master from his associates and demanded Rs., 10,00,000/- for releasing the victims. In the morning they again talked with their master and after half an hour they released them. Accordingly, the First Information Report has been lodged against the accused persons. On 2026:JHHC:26147 2 the basis of which Hunterganj PS case no. 62 of 2013 was registered under sections 364(A)/34 IPC and 17 (i) (ii) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. Charge-sheet was submitted and cognizance was taken keeping investigation pending. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the learned court below has failed to consider that in course of trial the informant appeared and deposed before the trial court and completely demolished the allegation levelled against the petitioner. It is further submitted that on account of pressure exerted by the police the name of the present petitioner has come in the First Information Report whereas as a matter of fact at the time of alleged occurrence there was dark night and it was not possible to identify anyone. It is further submitted that the learned court below has failed to appreciate that in the instant case the present petitioner was not apprehended and police party could not be able to make him prey of false allegation and thus the petitioner could not participate the protracted rigour of trial. The entire allegation has been built up by the police party and thus it is a fit case to discharge the petitioner. 5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and the learned counsel appearing for the State have jointly submitted that petitioner has never appeared before the concerned court and, as such, he has flouted the stage of appearance. 6. It appears that present petitioner is named accused in the Hunterganj P.S. Case No.62 of 2013 dated 14.6.2013 registered for the offence under sections 364(A) r/w 34 IPC and 17 (i) (ii) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act. During investigation, the petitioner was evading his arrest, therefore, process under sections 82 & 83 Cr.P.C. were issued against him. Thereafter, supplementary charge-sheet no. 241 of 2019 dated 31.12.2019 was submitted showing the present petitioner as absconder. The cognizance of offence was already taken by the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate on the submission of original charge sheet vide order dated 04.11.2013. The case record was kept in the personal file of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra for commitment of the case. It further appears that in the meantime the 2026:JHHC:26147 3 learned court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra vide order dated 27.2.2020 has observed that a fax copy of order no. 04 dated 10.2.2020 passed by this Court in Cr.M.P. No. 60 of 2020 has been received whereby processes under sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. issued against the petitioner were set-aside and the matter was remanded to the concerned court to proceed afresh and pass order in accordance with law. It further appears that ABA No. 4897 of 2019 was also rejected by this Court vide order dated 3.8.2021. The petitioner has also filed Cr.M.P. 2755 of 2021 for quashing of the FIR of this case which was withdrawn by the petitioner and, thus, the same was disposed of vide order dated 26.4.2022 with liberty to the petitioner to take all grounds at appropriate stage. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that a report was called for from the Sessions Judge, Chatra as to what steps have been taken after rejection of discharge petition filed by the petitioner. In compliance of the above order, a report has been submitted by the learned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Chatra vide letter no. 942 of 2026 along with the report submitted by the concerned Judicial Magistrate which reveals that the case of the petitioner has still not been committed to the court of Sessions and Sessions Trial case has not been registered as yet. Therefore, no question of filing of discharge petition arises. 8. From perusal of the record, it appears that the petitioner simply filed discharge application under section 227 Cr.P.C. vide Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 05 of 2023 (CNR No. JHCH010015622023) directly before the Sessions Judge which was rejected vide impugned order dated 18.4.2023 after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. 9. In the above background, it is crystal clear that in-spite of rejection of anticipatory bail of the petitioner up to this Court, he has not surrendered before the concerned court and has not been granted bail from any court. The petitioner has filed petition under section 227 Cr.P.C. directly before the Sessions Court which has been illegally heard and disposed of without following the procedure established by the law and, thus, the learned Sessions Judge has exceeded his 2026:JHHC:26147 4 jurisdiction. 10. In view of above, the impugned order dated 18.4.2023 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 05 of 2023, arising out of Hunterganj P.S. Case No. 62 of 2013 is hereby set-aside. 11. The case is still at the stage of appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chatra. Therefore, the petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned trial court and after commitment of the case, he may make further prayer in accordance with law, if so advised. 12. The present Criminal Revision stands disposed of. 13. Pending I.A(s), if any, is also disposed of, accordingly. 14. Let a copy of this order along with Trial Court Records (if any) be sent back to the court concerned for information and needful. (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.) Dated:31.08.2026 KNR Uploaded on:2.9.2026