Satyadeo Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 4551 Jhar

        IN     THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              Cr.M.P. No. 1705 of 2020
        1. Satyadeo Singh
        2. Sadan Kumar @
          Vivek Kumar @
          Vivek Kumar Singh                            .....   ...    Petitioners
                                     Versus
        The State of Jharkhand                         ....      ...    Opposite Party
                                 --------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate.

        For the State            :        Mr. Tapas Roy, A.P.P.
        For the Informant        :        Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate.
                                 :        Mr. Nishant Roy, Advocate.
                                 ------
03/ 14.11.2022       Heard Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner, Mr. Tapas Roy, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, learned senior counsel appearing for the informant.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 24.07.2020, by which, process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued against the petitioners, in connection with Airport P.S. Case No. 07 of 2020, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that by the impugned order dated 24.07.2020, the learned court has issued the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner, however, the satisfaction of the learned court is not recorded in the order and there is no reflection of the statutory provision of Form-IV Cr.P.C., which is mandatory in nature, as held by this court in Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustum & Ors. V. The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR

712.

4. Learned senior counsel appearing for the informant submits that the A.B.A. of the petitioners has already been withdrawn and the petitioners are not appearing before the learned court, that's why the learned court has rightly passed the order.

5. In view of the above submissions of the parties, the court has gone through the order dated 24.07.2020 and finds that the satisfaction of the learned court has not been recorded in the said order, moreover the statutory provision with regard to date and time, as held by this court in Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustum & Ors. V. The State of Jharkhand, reported in 2020 (2) JLJR 712 has also not been reflected in that order.

6. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 24.07.2020, by which, process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued against the petitioners, in connection with Airport P.S. Case No. 07 of 2020, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, is hereby, quashed and set aside. The matter is remitted back to the concerned court 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 & Ors. (Supra).

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this criminal miscellaneous petition stands disposed of. Pending I.A., if any, stands disposed of.

(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) Amitesh/-