Jharkhand High Court
Asha Sharma vs The State Of Jharkhand on 21 June, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 208 of 2021
------
1. Asha Sharma
2. Kirti Sharma
... .... .... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... .... Opposite Party
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioners : Mr. B.M. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, A.P.P.
For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Nagmani Tiwari, Advocate
06/21.06.2021 Heard Mr. B.M. Tripathi, learned senior counsel for the petitioners,
Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, learned counsel for the State and Mr. Nagmani
Tiwari, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2.
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 order dated
07.11.2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in Giridih
(T) P.S. Case No. 2/2020 (Nagar P.S. Case No. 2/2020) dated 03.01.2020
whereby process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the
petitioners.
Mr. B.M. Tripathy, learned senior counsel for the petitioners at the
outset submits that petitioners are ladies and they are not supposed to
escape. He submits that without following the parameters as indicated
under section 82 Cr.P.C, process of 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued. He submits
that so far as non-bailable warrant of arrest is concerned, there is not proper
execution of the same and there is no clear-cut finding on that point.
Mr. Prabir Kumar Chatterjee, learned counsel for the State and Mr.
Nagmani Tiwari, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 vehemently oppose the
prayer of the petitioners and submit that there is no illegality in the
impugned order and process under section 82 Cr.P.C. has rightly been
issued.
On perusal of impugned order, it appears that there is no
discussion of execution of N.B.W. From reading of section 82 Cr.P.C., it is
clear that at first the Court has to have sufficient materials before him to
reach to a conclusion to believe that a person, against whom warrant of
arrest has been issued, is absconding or is concealing himself, and it is not
possible for the authorities to execute the warrant of arrest. This satisfaction
has to be recorded in writing.
. It appears that parameters as held by this Court in the case of Md.
Rustam Alam @ Rustam & Ors. V. The State of Jharkhand, reported
in 2020 (2) JLJR 712 has not been followed.
In that view of the matter, impugned order dated 07.11.2020 is
quashed. However, the Court below is at liberty 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 disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Satyarthi/-
