Jharkhand High Court
Binod Singh @ Vinod Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand on 23 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. M.P. No. 817 of 2020
----
Binod Singh @ Vinod Kumar Singh ... Petitioner
-versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
----
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN
THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING
----
For the Petitioner : Ms. Rashmi Kumari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shiv Kumar Sharma, A.P.P.
----
6/ 23.02.2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel
appearing for the State through Video Conferencing. The lawyers have no
objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through Video
Conferencing today at 11.00 a.m. They have no complain in respect to the
audio and video clarity and quality.
2. Order dated 29.11.2007 is under challenge by which processes
under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been issued against
the petitioner in connection with Sessions Trial No.171 of 2007 [arising out of
Koderma (Domchanch) Police Station Case No.116 of 2006 [G.R. No.172 of
2006)]. Petitioner has also challenged the order dated 04.02.2008 whereby
attachment order in terms of Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has
been issued against the petitioner. Petitioner has also challenged the order
dated 22.07.2008 by which the petitioner has been declared as permanent
absconder.
3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 29.11.2007
issuing process under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been
passed in a most mechanical manner, without recording any subjective
satisfaction. Similar is the case when the order was passed on 04.02.2008
issuing attachment order in terms of Section 83 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
4. After hearing the parties, I have gone through the impugned
orders and the record. After going through the same, I find that the order dated
29.11.2007 issuing processes under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure has been passed without complying with the provisions of law.
Further, I find that service report of the warrant was awaiting and inspite of that
processes under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been
issued. Similar is the position when attachment order in terms of Section 83 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure has been passed on 04.02.2008.
5. Thus, in view of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of
Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Others versus State of Jharkhand as
reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712, orders dated 29.11.2007 and 04.02.2008
passed in connection with Sessions Trial No.171 of 2007 [arising out of
Koderma (Domchanch) Police Station Case No.116 of 2006 [G.R. No.172 of
2006)] are hereby set aside. Consequentially, the order dated 22.07.2008, by
which petitioner has been declared as permanent absconder is also hereby set
aside. The matter is remanded to the Court below to pass fresh order in
accordance with law and in consonance with the judgment passed by this
Court in the case of Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Others versus State of
Jharkhand as reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712.
6. This criminal miscellaneous petition is, accordingly, allowed.
(Ananda Sen, J.)
Kumar/Cp-03
