Dularchand Sao vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 1513 Jhar

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                             Cr. M.P. No. 2346 of 2020
             Dularchand Sao, aged about 36 years, S/o Kokil Sao, resident of Village
             Kanchanpur, P.O. & P.S. Saria, Dist. Giridih     ... Petitioner
                                         -Versus-
             The State of Jharkhand                           ... Opposite Party
                                            -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, Advocate For the Opposite Party-State : Mr. Hemant Jain, A.C. to S.C.-IV

-----

05/24.03.2021. Heard Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Hemant Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party-State.

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.

The present petition has been filed for quashing the order dated

27.07.2020 passed by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih in

connection with Saria P.S. Case No. 171 of 2019, whereby, process under

Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner.

On perusal of the order dated 27.07.2020 by which process under

Section 82 Cr.P.C. Has been issued against the petitioner, it transpires that

execution report of warrant of arrest was issued by the court on 24.06.2020

against the accused praying therein that the I.O. has conducted raids in the

house of the accused person for his arrest on 26.06.2020, 05.07.2020 and

16.07.2020, but the accused is absconding from fear of his arrest and on

the requisition the I.O. has also obtained signature of the witnesses and

thereafter the prayer for issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has

been prayed. The learned court below has considered several judgments

and has passed the reasoned order for issuance of process. Thus, there is

no illegality in the impugned order dated 27.07.2020. Accordingly, no relief

can be extended to the petitioner and the same is, therefore, dismissed.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Ajay/