[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Prakash Pradhan vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 9 March, 2026
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
[2026:JHHC:6159]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No.556 of 2026
------
Prakash Pradhan, aged about 62 years, Son of Sri A Pradhan,
resident of 6th Lane, Anant Nagar, TATA Benz Square, Komapalli,
Berhampur, P.O.- Hill Patna, P.S. Baidyanathpur, Berhampur,
District Ganjam, Odisha- 760005
... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Parth S.A.S. Pati, Advocate
For the State : Mr. Shahabuddin, SC-VII
------
PRESENT
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with several
prayers, but at the outset, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the
petitioner that the petitioner does not press the prayers to quash the orders
dated 13.01.2023 and 31.05.2023, but confines his prayer only to quash the
orders dated 13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional
Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S.
Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 registered for the
offences punishable under Section 409, 420 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code
whereby and where under the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
[2026:JHHC:6159]
Porahat at Chaibasa has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure inter alia against the petitioner.
3. Accordingly, the prayers to quash the orders dated 13.01.2023 and
31.05.2023 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at
Chaibasa in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010
corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of 2010, are rejected as not pressed.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been issued vide orders dated
13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024 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 the Code of Criminal Procedure, that too
without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner, who is the
accused person of the said case. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer to quash
and set aside the orders dated 13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the learned
Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with
Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42 of
2010, be allowed.
5. Learned Standing Counsel-VII appearing for the State vehemently
opposes the prayer for quashing the orders dated 13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024
passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa
in connection with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to
G.R. Case No.42 of 2010 and submits that the very fact that the learned Sub-
Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has issued the proclamation
[2026:JHHC:6159]
under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure itself shows that there were
materials available in the record for the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa 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.
6. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully
going through the materials available 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 the Code of Criminal Procedure must record
its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is made, is absconding or
concealing himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to issue the
proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it must
mention the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself
by which the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
is issued.
7. As already indicated above since the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial
Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa has neither 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, this Court has no hesitation in
holding that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at
Chaibasa has committed illegality by issuing the said proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without complying with the
mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not sustainable in law and
[2026:JHHC:6159]
the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law and this is
a fit case where the orders dated 13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the
learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection
with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42
of 2010, be quashed and set aside against the petitioner named above.
8. Accordingly, the orders dated 13.09.2023 and 18.06.2024 passed by the
learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa in connection
with Chakardharpur P.S. Case No.22 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.42
of 2010, is quashed and set aside against the petitioner named above.
9. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Porahat at Chaibasa may
pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
10. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed to the
aforesaid extent only.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
Dated the 09th of March, 2026
AFR/ Saroj
Uploaded on 10/03/2026
