logo

This Product is Licensed to ,

Change Font Style & Size  Show / Hide

24

  •            

 
CDJ 2026 Jhar HC 102 print Preview print print
Court : High Court of Jharkhand
Case No : Cr.M.P. No. 534 of 2026
Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Parties : Sujit Kumar Saw @ Litu @ Sujeet Kumar Versus The State of Jharkhand
Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioners: Vishal Srivastava, Advocate. For the Respondent: Bhola Nath Ojha, Spl. PP.
Date of Judgment : 27-02-2026
Head Note :-
BNSS - Section 528 -

Comparative Citation;
2026 JHHC 5944,
Judgment :-

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of BNSS with the prayer of quashing and setting aside the order dated 25.11.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in connection with NDPS case no. 05 of 2025 arising out of Gomia P.S. case no. 69 of 2025 whereby and where under, learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro has issued proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC without fixing time and place for appearance of the petitioner, who is accused person of the case.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is not in accordance with law as the learned Sessions Judge has not fixed the time and place for appearance of the petitioner, hence, it is submitted that the prayer as made in this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition be allowed.

4. Learned Spl. PP on the other hand submits that the petitioner who is the accused person of the case, is expected to appears before the court concerned, during the court hours on any day, after 30 days of the proclamation, hence, no illegality has been committed by learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro, hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition being without any merit, be dismissed.

5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that it is a settled principle of law that the court which decides to issue proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC after being satisfied that the accused person of the case is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest, then the court must fix time and place for appearance of the accused person, in respect of whom, the proclamation under Section 82 of CrPC is issued, in the order itself, by which such proclamation is ordered to be issued.

6. Now coming to the facts of the case, the undisputed fact remains that learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro has not mentioned any time or place for appearance of the accused persons of the case, including the petitioner herein. Accordingly, this court has no hesitation in holding that the impugned order dated 25.11.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in connection with NDPS case no. 05 of 2025 arising out of Gomia P.S. case no. 69 of 2025 is not sustainable in law qua the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, the order dated 25.11.2025 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro in connection with NDPS case no. 05 of 2025 arising out of Gomia P.S. case no. 69 of 2025 is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner.

8. Learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

9. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent only.

 
  CDJLawJournal