Jitendra Lohra vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1278 Jhar

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                                       Cr. M.P. No. 125 of 2021
                 Jitendra Lohra, aged about 26 years, Son of Bishnu Lohra, resident of
                 village Pahamu, P.O. Bhurso, P.S. Sisai, District- Gumla
                                                                     ... Petitioner
                                        -Versus-
                  The State of Jharkhand                           ... Opposite Party
                                            -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

             For the Petitioner             : Mrs. Supriya Dayal, Advocate
             For the State                  : Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P.
                                            -----

03/15.03.2021. Heard Mrs. Supriya Dayal, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Someshwar Roy, learned A.P.P. appearing for the opposite party-State.

2. This criminal miscellaneous 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.

3. The petitioner has preferred this criminal miscellaneous petition for

quashing the orders dated 04.09.2020 and 17.10.2020 passed by the

learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga by which warrant of

arrest and a process under Section 82 Cr. P.C. has been issued against the

petitioner respectively.

4. Pursuant to the order dated 09.02.2021, copy of Form-IV has been

received. On perusal of Form-IV, it transpires that there is no mention of

time and place, which is in violation of the judgment passed by this Court in

the case of Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Ors. v. The State of

Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712.

5. In view of the fact that the judgment passed by this Court is not

complied in issuing the Form-IV, the impugned orders dated 04.09.2020 and

17.10.2020 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate,

Lohardaga are quashed.

6. 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. Rustum Alam @ Rustam (supra), in accordance

with law.

7. With the above direction, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands

disposed of.

8. Interim order dated 09.02.2021 stands vacated.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/