Jharkhand High Court
Kishor Mandal (Aged About 45 Yrs) Son Of ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 6 October, 2025
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
(2025:JHHC:30760)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No. 3382 of 2022
Kishor Mandal (aged about 45 yrs) son of Shivnarayan Mandal,
resident of Village-Deowandih, within P.O.-Chunglo, P.S.-Gandey,
Dist.-Giridih
.... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... Opp. Party
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
.....
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Bhola N. Ojha, Spl. 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 the prayer
to quash the order dated 17.05.2022 passed by the learned Sessions
Judge, Giridih in Criminal Revision No. 39 of 2022 which was filed
challenging the order dated 18.04.2011 passed by the learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in connection with Gandey P.S. Case
No.60 of 2005, corresponding to G.R. No.1670 of 2005 whereby and
where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has
issued the proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. against the
petitioner, who is one of the accused person of the case.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that though
the petitioner also prayed for quashing the order dated 18.07.2012
(2025:JHHC:30760)
passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in the
said case by which the attachment order of the property of the
petitioner was also issued but the petitioner does not press the said
prayer and confines his prayer only to quash the order dated
18.04.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih
in connection with Gandey P.S. Case No.60 of 2005, corresponding to
G.R. No.1670 of 2005 by which the proclamation under Section 82
Cr.P.C. was issued.
4. Accordingly, the order dated 18.07.2012 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih is rejected as not pressed.
5. So far as the order dated 18.04.2011 is concerned, it is submitted by
the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has issued the proclamation under
Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without following the due process of law and
without recording the satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or
concealing himself to evade his arrest which is a sine qua non for
issuing proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. and without fixing
any time or place for the appearance of the petitioner who is the
accused person of the case; vide order dated 17.05.2022 in Criminal
Revision No.39 of 2022, the learned Sessions Judge, Giridih without
taking into consideration the settled principle of law, as to when the
proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. can be issued, has dismissed
the said criminal revision in a mechanical manner, without
application of mind. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed
for by the petitioner in this criminal miscellaneous petition be
allowed.
(2025:JHHC:30760)
6. Learned Special Public Prosecutor on the other hand opposes the
prayer and submits that the very fact that the learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has issued the proclamation under
Section 82 of Cr.P.C. itself shows that there were materials available
in the record for the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih to
be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such
proclamation. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous
petition being without any merit be dismissed.
7. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here
that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which issues
the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. must record its
satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation
under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is made, is absconding or concealing
himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to issue
proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C., it must mention the time
and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself by
which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued.
Perusal of the record reveals that in the order dated 18.04.2011
passed in connection with Gandey P.S. Case No.60 of 2005,
corresponding to G.R. No.1670 of 2005, the learned Judicial
Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has not recorded its satisfaction that the
petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest nor
fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioner, who is the
accused person of this case in respect of whom, the said
proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued. The learned
Sessions Judge, Giridih has also committed a grave error in
(2025:JHHC:30760)
dismissing the Criminal Revision No. 39 of 2022 without taking into
consideration the essential requirement for issuing the proclamation
under Section 82 Cr.P.C. as stated above in the foregoing paragraphs
of this judgment. Hence, this Court has no hesitation in holding that
both the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in the order
dated 18.04.2011 as well as the learned Sessions Judge, Giridih in the
order dated 17.05.2022 passed in Criminal Revision No. 39 of 2022
have committed a grave illegality. Hence, the order dated 18.04.2011
passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in
connection with Gandey P.S. Case No.60 of 2005, corresponding to
G.R. No.1670 of 2005 as well as the order dated 17.05.2022 passed by
the learned Sessions Judge, Giridih in Criminal Revision No. 39 of
2022 be quashed and set aside.
8. Accordingly, the order dated 18.04.2011 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in connection with Gandey P.S.
Case No.60 of 2005, corresponding to G.R. No.1670 of 2005 as well as
the order dated 17.05.2022 passed by the learned Sessions Judge,
Giridih in Criminal Revision No. 39 of 2022 is quashed and set aside.
9. The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih may pass a fresh
order in accordance with law.
10. In the result, this criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 6th October, 2025
AFR/Sonu-Gunjan/-
Uploaded on 09/10/2025
