Jharkhand High Court
Niwas Kumar Bernwal vs State Of Jharkhand on 8 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 1825 of 2021
Niwas Kumar Bernwal ..... ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Jharkhand ..... ... Opposite Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P.
------
02/ 08.09.2021 Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, learned Counsel appearing for
the petitioner and Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned counsel appearing for the
State.
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.
3. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for
quashing of the order dated 07.10.2015, whereby warrant of arrest has
been issued against the petitioner and also for quashing of the order dated
21.4.2016, whereby proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been
issued against the petitioner, in connection with Chutia P.S. Case No. 243
of 2014(S), pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class,
Ranchi.
4. Mr. Rahul Kumar Das, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner submits that both the orders are not passed in accordance with
law. He submits that the order dated 07.10.2015 is bad in law, in view of
Section 73 of the Cr.P.C. He relied upon a judgment of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami Versus State of
Uttaranchal, reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1 and submits that in view of
that order, the order issuing the warrant of arrest is bad in law and the
same is fit to be quashed. He further submits that proclamation under
Section 82 Cr.P.C. is also not in accordance with the parameters of
Section 82 Cr.P.C.
5. Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned counsel appearing for the State
submits that so far as the order dated 07.10.2015 is concerned that can be
maintained as the same has been passed by the learned Court after
looking into the case diary and considering the prayer made by the I.O.
6. On perusal of the order dated 07.10.2015, it transpires that
the concerned Court has looked into the case diary and the prayer thereof
and thereafter the order of issuing the warrant of arrest has been
passed. The petitioner is facing the charge under Sections 376, 302 and
201 of the Indian Penal Code. The judgment relied upon by the learned
counsel appearing for the petitioner as in the case of Inder Mohan
Goswami (supra) was considered and the Court has clearly come to the
conclusion by recording that Courts should strike a balance between
social interests and personal liberty and exercise its discretion cautiously.
7. In view of the aforesaid facts, this Court comes to a
conclusion that societal interest is involved in this case in view of the
nature of crime, no interference is required in the order 07.10.2015 and
the prayer with regard to that order, is hereby, rejected.
8. So far as the order dated 21.4.2016, whereby proclamation
under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner is
concerned, there is no indication of Form-IV Cr.P.C., which is statutory in
nature, as held by this court in Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustum & Ors. V.
The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712.
9. As such, the order dated 21.4.2016, whereby proclamation
under section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner, in
connection with Chutia P.S. Case No. 243 of 2014(S), pending in the
Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, is hereby, quashed.
10. The petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned
Court on or before 23.09.2021.
11. If the petitioner will not appear on or before that date the
concerned Court shall take all coercive steps against the petitioner.
12.. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this criminal
miscellaneous petition stands disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Amitesh/-
