Md. Tanbir vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1152 Jhar

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                     Cr.M.P No. 2495 of 2020
                Md. Tanbir                                     .... .... Petitioner(s).
                                           Versus
                The State of Jharkhand                         .... .... Opposite Party(s)
                                      ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.

THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING

------

FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate FOR THE STATE : Mr. Jitendra Pandey, APP

------

04/08.03.2021 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 complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner(s) and the learned Counsel for the State.

By filing this application, petitioner has prayed to quash the order dated 28.11.2017 passed in Basantrai P.S. Case No. 2 of 2017 by which process under 82 Cr.P.C has been issued. Further he also challenges the order dated 7.5.2019 by which attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C has been issued.

I have gone through the impugned order, I find that the order is absolutely cryptic and non-speaking. No subjective satisfaction has been recorded in the impugned order passed by the Magistrate.

Considering the aforesaid fact and in view of the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Ors Vrs. State of Jharkhand reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712, I am inclined to set aside the order dated 28.11.2017 passed in G.R. No. 82 of 2017 arising out of Basantrai P.S. case No. 2 of 2017 by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda. Consequently the order dated 7.5.2019 by which attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C has been issued is also set aside.

Accordingly, the instant petition stands allowed. The matter is remitted back to the court concerned to pass order afresh in accordance with the judgment passed by this Court in the case of Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam (supra).

(ANANDA SEN , J) anjali/ C.P 3