Jharkhand High Court
Sunil @ Sunil Modhak @ Sunil Kumar Modak vs The State Of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party on 3 January, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
1 Cr.M.P. No.3199 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 3199 of 2023
Sunil @ Sunil Modhak @ Sunil Kumar Modak, aged about 60 years, son
of Sudhir @ Yudhisthir Madak, resident of Village -Harladih, P.O. &
P.S. -Harladih, District -Giridih.
.... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opp. Party
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh Tewari, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P.
.....
By the Court:-
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer
for quashing the order dated 29.04.2023, passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih in connection with Pirtand
P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012 whereby the learned Additional Sessions
Judge directed for issue of the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that in
the prayer portion, though the petitioner has mentioned that the
petitioner is also challenging the attachment order under Section
83 Cr.P.C. but the petitioner could not mention the same in the
criminal miscellaneous petition but the date of the order by which
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih has issued the
order for attachment of the property of the petitioner is of dated
30.05.2023.
4. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is an accused of
Pirtand P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012 involving the offences punishable
under Section 121A/124A/147/148/149/307/109/120B of the
Indian Penal Code, under Section 27 of the Arms Act, under
Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and under
Section 13 of the U.A.P. Act. The petitioner has been named as
Sunil Harladih in the F.I.R. On 29.04.2023. The Sub-Inspector of
Police filed a petition before the Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Giridih with execution report of warrant of arrest issued inter-alia
against the petitioner. Therein, the I.O. of the case stated that he
conducted raid inter-alia in the house of the petitioner on six
different dates which has been mentioned in the impugned order;
in the presence of local witnesses whose names have also been
mentioned in the impugned order but inter-alia the petitioner was
not found in his house. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Giridih discussed the law and facts involved in the case and from
the facts that the petitioner was not found in his house on
different dates when the I.O. of the case raided the house, the
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih was satisfied that
there is likelihood of the petitioner tampering with the evidence
and destroying the evidence and his evading the process of law.
Hence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih has issued
order for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. fixing
date and time for appearance of the petitioner who was the
accused person before it. On 30.05.2023, the execution report of
the proclamation issued under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was placed
before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, with a prayer for
issuance of attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C. The learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih considering the law and facts
and being satisfied that there is requirement for issuing the
attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C. issued the same inter-
alia against the petitioner.
5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner relying
upon the Judgment of a coordinate Bench of this Court in the case
of Md. Rustum Alam @ Rustam & Ors. vs. The State of
Jharkhand dated 27.04.2020 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 2722 of 2019
that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih has failed to
consider the fact that the petitioner was named only as Sunil
Harladih and not his full name in which name non-bailable
warrant of arrest was issued against him. It is further submitted
that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I failed to consider that
straightway the order of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C.
was issued against the petitioner about ten years after the
registration of the F.I.R.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the
Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Siddharth Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr., in Criminal
Appeal No. 838 of 2021 dated 16.08.2021 wherein the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India has observed that it is only in cases of
utmost necessity, where the investigation cannot be completed
without arresting the accused person, his arrest may be necessary.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the
Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Aman
Preet Singh Vs. C.B.I. Through Director, dated 02.09.2021 in
Criminal Appeal No. 929 of 2021 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India has taken note of the observations made by the
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Siddharth Vs. The
State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr. (supra). It is next submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioner that no notice, summons or
any information was ever issued to the petitioner before issuing
the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. Hence, it is submitted
that order dated 29.04.2023, passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Giridih in connection with Pirtand P.S. Case No.
46 of 2012 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge
directed for issue of the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C and also
the order dated 20.05.2023 passed in connection with the said
Pirtand P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012 by which attachment order of
property of the petitioner has been passed under Section 83
Cr.P.C. be quashed and set aside.
8. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand vehemently
opposes the prayer to quash the order dated 29.04.2023, passed by
the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih in connection
with Pirtand P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012 whereby the learned
Additional Sessions Judge directed for issue of the process under
Section 82 Cr.P.C and also the order dated 30.05.2023 passed in
connection with the said Pirtand P.S. Case No. 46 of 2012 by
which attachment order of property of the petitioner has been
passed under Section 83 Cr.P.C. and submits that the F.I.R. is not
the encyclopedia of the prosecution case and in the F.I.R., the
person who has been described as Sunil Harladih is the same
person against whom non-bailable warrant has undisputedly been
issued and the same is under challenge; in this criminal
miscellaneous petition. It is submitted by the learned Public
Prosecutor that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I
categorically recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner is evading
his arrest which is evident from the fact that though police raided
the house of the petitioner on several occasions but he could not
be apprehended by the police. Hence, it is submitted that no
illegality has been committed by the learned Additional Sessions
Judge-I, Giridih in the order dated 29.04.2023. So far as the order
dated 30.05.2023 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned
Public Prosecutor that therein also, there is no illegality therein
also; as the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih, after
considering the law in respect of the matter and also considering
the facts of the case, after application of mind has taken a
conscious decision for issuing the attachment order of the
property inter-alia of the petitioner under Section 83 Cr.P.C.
Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition
being without any merit be dismissed.
9. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here
that the coordinate Bench in the case of Md. Rustum Alam @
Rustam & Ors. vs. The State of Jharkhand (supra) has reiterated
the settled principle of law regarding exercise of the jurisdiction
by the Court under Section 82 and 83 Cr.P.C.
10. Now coming to the facts of the case, after carefully going
through the orders dated 29.04.2023 and 30.05.2023, this Court is
satisfied that the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih has
consciously applied its mind to the requirement for issuing the
proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. as well as the attachment of
property of inter-alia the petitioner under Section 83 Cr.P.C. The
learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih has discussed the law
and facts before issuing the same. Hence, this Court do not find
any illegality in the orders dated 29.04.2023 and 30.05.2023, passed
by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Giridih.
11. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition being without
any merit is dismissed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 3rd January, 2024
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
