Naveen Topno vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1877 Jhar

       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                       Cr.M.P. No. 2671 of 2020
                                 ------

1. Naveen Topno

2. Amrit Topno

3. Pankaj Topno ... .... .... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ... .... Opposite Party

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioners : Mr. Sunil Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P.

06/10.06.2021 Heard Mr. Sunil Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr.

Someshwar Roy, learned counsel for the State.

This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of

the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due

to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any

technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been

heard

The present petition has been filed for quashing of orders dated

09.06.2020 & 19.10.2020 whereby non-bailable warrant of arrest and

process under section 82 Cr.P.C. respectively have been issued against the

petitioners in connection with Chandwa P.S. Case No. 43/2020, pending in

the Court of learned A.C.J.M, Latehar.

Mr. Sunil Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

without following the parameters as indicated under warrant of arrest and

section 82 Cr.P.C, non-bailable warrant of arrest as well as process under

section 82 Cr.P.C. have been issued as there is no indication of time and

place. He submits that non-bailable warrant of arrest as well as process

under section 82 Cr.P.C. have not been issued in compliance of judgement

passed by this Court in the case of Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustam & Ors.

V. The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712.

Mr. Someshwar Roy, learned counsel for the State tried to justify the

impugned orders and submits that there is no illegality in the impugned

orders and non-bailable warrant of arrest and process under section 82

Cr.P.C. have rightly been issued.

On perusal of impugned orders dated 09.06.2020 and 19.10.2020,

it transpires that guidelines of Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustam (supra) has

not been followed and the parameters of warrant of arrest and Section 82

Cr.P.C. have not been complied as time and place has not been indicated.

In that view of the matter, impugned orders dated 09.06.2020 &

19.10.2020 are quashed. The matter is remitted back to the court below to

proceed afresh in terms of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the

judgment passed by this Court in the case of Md. Rustam Alam @

Rustam (supra), in accordance with law.

With the above observation and direction, this criminal

miscellaneous petition stands allowed and disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

Satyarthi/-