Patna High Court - Orders
Aditya Kumar vs The State Of Bihar Through The ... on 23 December, 2022
Author: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
Bench: Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
(FROM RESIDENTIAL OFFICE VIA VIDEO APPLICATION)
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1597 of 2022
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-33 Year-2022 Thana- ECONOMIC OFFENCES, BIHAR
District- Patna
======================================================
ADITYA KUMAR Son of Sri Sunderpal Resident of 626-B, Subhash Nagar,
P.S- Civil Line, Dist- Meerut (u.P) presently resident of B-505, Vasikunj
apartment, Saguna More, P.S- Rupaspur, Dist- Patna
... ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Dept. of Home, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna
2. The Director General of Police, Economic Offences Unit, Govt. of Bihar,
Patna
3. The Additional Director General of Police, Economic Offences Unit, Govt.
of Bihar, Patna
4. The Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Unit, Patna
5. The Station House Officer, Economic Offences Police Station, Patna
6. The Investigation officer, Economic Offences Police Station, Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. S.D. Sanjay, Sr. Advocate
Ms. Priya Gupta, Advocate
For the E.O.U. : Mr.Rana Vikram Singh, Advocate
Ms.Soni Srivastav, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD
ORAL ORDER
2 23-12-2022This matter has been listed today in virtual hearing in the cause list on direction of the Hon'ble Criminal Application and Motion Bench where the matter was mentioned on 22.12.2022.
Heard Mr. S. D. Sanjay, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. Priya Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. In the morning session, Ms. Soni Srivastava, learned Advocate had Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1597 of 2022(2) dt.23-12-2022 2/6 appeared on behalf of the Economic Offence Unit (in short 'E.O.U.') and after some interaction she was granted time to convey the I.O. of the case to be present for interaction.
The case was fixed on the request of Ms. Soni Srivastava, learned Advocate at 01:00 PM whereafter, Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned Advocate has entered appearance on behalf of the E.O.U. The I.O. is present in her chamber and this Court has interacted with him. This Court has been informed that Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned Advocate will be assisting this Court on behalf of the E.O.U. In the given circumstance, this Court has requested Ms. Soni Srivastava to be present in course of hearing in order to take her assistance and she has assisted this Court together with Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned Advocate.
In course of hearing, the main grievance of learned senior counsel for the petitioner is towards the manner in which the investigating agency has proceeded to obtain an order under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and is looking to obtain another order under Section 83 Cr.P.C.
Learned senior counsel submits that this petitioner had earlier applied for anticipatory bail in the court of learned Sessions Judge, Patna which was transferred to learned Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1597 of 2022(2) dt.23-12-2022 3/6 Additional Sessions Judge XXI, Patna for hearing. The said application was taken up for consideration on 11.11.2022. On the said date, the learned Additional Sessions Judge XXI, Patna called for the case diary and the next date was fixed on 18.11.2022. According to him, on 18.11.2022 the E.O.U. was represented through its lawyer but it is not clear as to who was representing the E.O.U. The case diary was not produced on the said date, the Court, therefore, fixed the matter on 25.11.2022. On the said date, Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned Advocate for the E.O.U. appeared and requested the learned court to grant one week's time to him to go through the case diary and prepare himself with the brief. The learned court below adjourned the matter for a week.
Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits that on the one hand the adjournment for one week was sought from the learned Additional Sessions Judge XXI, Patna in the name of preparing with the case diary but the I.O. of the case acted in haste and on the same day, he moved an application in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Patna seeking issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. This conduct on the part of the investigating officer has been assailed alleging that it was done in a haste and cannot be said to be fair. Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1597 of 2022(2) dt.23-12-2022 4/6 This Court has been shown that the application dated 25.11.2022 was moved on 02.12.2022 i.e. within a period of one week only and on the said date 82 Cr.P.C. process was taken out. This Court has been informed that later, on 03.12.2022 the anticipatory bail of the petitioner was rejected.
Learned senior counsel submits that he is not fully aware whether 82 Cr.P.C. has been executed at his local residential flat or not but a format of 82 Cr.P.C. process has been served upon the father of the petitioner at his village home.
Learned senior counsel has, therefore, submitted that the impugned order dated 02.12.2022 is bad in law and in the given facts and circumstances of the case, the E.O.U. be restrained from taking further steps to apply for proclamation under Section 83 Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the petitioner has applied for anticipatory bail in this Hon'ble Court vide token no. 80853 of 2021. It is a defect free application since 12.12.2022 but it has not been registered and is not showing listed in the cause list. Under these circumstances, the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner has not been taken up in this Court.
Learned senior counsel has further relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Rudal Yadav v. State of Bihar in Cr. Misc No. 33342 of 2019 and in the case of Anand Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1597 of 2022(2) dt.23-12-2022 5/6 Kumar v. the State of Bihar in Cr.W.J.C. No. 2115 of 2017. Learned senior counsel has further relied upon an another order of this Court in the case of Krishna Mohal Lal and Another v. The State of Bihar and Another reported in 2022 (3) BLJR 74 to submit that this Court has taken a view that where the accused is seeking anticipatory bail and is seeking his remedy, it would not be appropriate to say that he is absconding. It is submitted that in the case of Krishna Mohan Lal (supra) the informant went before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP (Cr.) No. 2817 of 2022 (Baby Das v. State of Bihar and Others) which was dismissed.
Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the E.O.U. has interacted with the Dy.S.P. and after his interaction he has made a statement before this Court that till further hearing of this case, Dy.S.P. shall not take any further step towards execution of either 82 Cr.P.C. process, if at all it is pending, and during this period he will not file any application in the learned court below for issuance of proclamation under Section 83 Cr.P.C.
Since the learned counsel for the E.O.U. has taken the above mentioned stand, the same is being recorded in the order and shall form part of the order.
Patna High Court CR. WJC No.1597 of 2022(2) dt.23-12-2022 6/6 As prayed by learned counsel for the parties, let this case be listed on 11.01.2023 under the appropriate heading, maintaining its position.
Mr. Rana Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the E.O.U. shall produce the case diary of the case on the next date.
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) tusharika/-
U T