Jharkhand High Court
Ajit Kumar Singh @ Ajit Singh vs State Of Jharkhand .... .... Opposite ... on 1 June, 2020
Author: Ananda Sen
Bench: Ananda Sen
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P No. 4014 of 2019
1. Ajit Kumar Singh @ Ajit Singh
2. Ajay Kumar Singh @ Ajay Singh
3. Sanjay Kumar Singh @ Sanjay Singh @ Sanjay Kumar
4. Suresh Kumar Singh @ Suresh Singh
5. Laljit Marandi .... .... Petitioner(s).
Versus
State of Jharkhand .... .... Opposite Party(s)
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN.
THROUGH : VIDEO CONFERENCING
------
FOR THE PETITIONER(S) : Mr. Prabhash Ch. Sinha, Advocate FOR THE STATE : Mr. Ashok Kumar, APP
------
04/01.06.2020 Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing. They have no complain with respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.
Counsel for the petitioners at present is not pressing his prayer which relates to challenging the entire criminal proceeding and he confines his prayer only to the order dated 4.6.2016 by which non-bailable warrant of arrest has been issued and thereafter subsequently processes under Section 82 Cr.P.C and attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C have been issued. He submits that they were already on bail and there was a stay as per the application filed by the co-accused and when the said application was allowed the petitioners could not appear and subsequently non-bailable warrant of arrest and processes under Sections 82 Cr.P.C and attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C have been issued. He submits that since they were on bail they may be given an opportunity to appear before the court below.
Considering the submission of the petitioners and going through the impugned orders, I find that petitioners were on bail but could not appear as a result of which non-bailable warrant of arrest were issued and subsequently processes under Section 82 Cr.P.C and attachment order dated 83 Cr.P.C has been issued. The orders by which processes under Section 82 Cr.P.C and attachment order under Section 83 Cr.P.C have been passed are absolutely cryptic and unreasoned one and thus needs to be set aside. So far as non-bailable warrant of arrest is concerned, I find some force in the submission of the counsel for the petitioners.
Considering the submission of the counsel for the petitioners, I direct the petitioners to appear before the court below within four weeks from today. If they appear and file a fresh bail bond, the same should be accepted by the court if it is in order. If they appear and file a fresh bail bond within the aforesaid time, the impugned orders will not be given effect to. If they fail to appear within the aforesaid time frame, the court below will proceed against them.
Accordingly, this application stands disposed of.
(ANANDA SEN , J) anjali/ C.P 3