Md. Sarfaraz @ Md. Sarfraj vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 954 Jhar

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                           Cr.M.P. No. 2466 of 2020

                      Md. Sarfaraz @ Md. Sarfraj                                    .... Petitioner(s).
                                                        Versus
                      The State of Jharkhand                                        ... Opp. Party(s)
                                           ------

             CORAM        :     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
                                Through: Video Conferencing
                                                   ------

             For the Petitioner(s)   : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate.
             For the State           : Mr. Ashok Kumar, A.P.P.
                                           .........

05/25.02.2021:               It is admitted fact that the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected

in the year 2015 by this High Court. Thereafter, the petitioner did not appear before the court below. The process under Section 82 Cr.P.C has also been issued against the petitioner vide order dated 25.6.2015 by the learned CJM, Giridih, in connection with Giridih Town P.S. Case No. 220/2013 (G.R. No. 2402/2013). Thereafter, the petitioner in the year 2020 has filed this petition praying therein for quashing the process issued under Section 82 Cr.P.C.

Learned A.P.P opposes the prayer of the petitioner but submits that chargesheet has not been filed.

The police has failed to file chargesheet and also failed to apprehend the petitioner, whose anticipatory bail was rejected upto by the High Court in the year 2015. Even if the order issuing process under Section 82 Cr.P.C is cryptic that will not help the petitioner as the petitioner has not surrendered before the court below.

The existence of order issuing process under Section 82 Cr.P.C does not refrain the petitioner from surrendering before the court below and pray for regular bail. Though, by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, the anticipatory bail of an absconder is not maintainable, but in this case, anticipatory bail of the petitioner has already been rejected upto by the High Court. Thus, the petitioner will have to appear before the court below and surrender, then pray for regular bail.

Since the petitioner has not appeared before the court below, though it was in his knowledge that the case is pending against him before the court below and his prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected upto by the High Court, I am not inclined to entertain this petition.

Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.

       Anu/-C.P.-3                                                                (ANANDA SEN, J.)