Back
SANDEEP KUMAR
Ravi Kumar S/o Deonath Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar Bihar – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 15.07.2023 and 17.08.2023 passed by the S.D.J.M. Daudnagar, Aurangabad in Daudnagar P.S. Case No. 407 of 2022.
2. It is the contention of the petitioner is that the application for issuance of process under Section 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. was not supported by any document and the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of this Court in the case of Krishna Murari Yadav Vs. State of Bihar, 2005 SCC Online Pat 712.
3. The learned counsel for the O.P. No. 02 and the learned APP for the State have vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and have submitted that even without the supporting affidavit, the Court below has power to issue process under Section 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C.
4. I have considered the submissions of the parties.
5. Section 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C. reads as follows:
(1) If any Court has reason to believe (whether after taking evidence or not) that any person against whom a warrant has been issued by it has absconded or is concealing himself so that such warrant cannot be executed, such Court may publish a written proclamation requirin
The Magistrate must substantiate satisfaction with evidence before issuing a proclamation under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C., and routine issuance of such orders is impermissible.
Court must comply with mandatory requirements of law when issuing orders under Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C., or such orders will be quashed.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with mandatory provisions of law for the issuance of proclamation and process under Section 82 and 83 of Cr.P.C.
Proclamation and attachment – Essential ingredients for exercise of power is subjective satisfaction of court that warrantee is hiding himself to evade process of law – Mere absence from home cannot ....
Use of the expression ‘after making such inquiry as it thinks fit’ implies that at the time of pronouncing a person as ‘proclaimed person ’ or ‘proclaimed offender ’, the concerned Court has to satis....
Magistrate must substantively satisfy issuance of Section 82 proceedings; routine orders without indication of reason are illegal.
Use of the expression ‘after making such inquiry as it thinks fit’ implies that at the time of pronouncing a person as ‘proclaimed person’ or ‘proclaimed offender’, the concerned Court has to satisfy....
The simultaneous issuance of warrants under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must comply with specific statutory conditions; failure to do so renders the order unjustified.
The court ruled that a person cannot be declared an Absconder without proper application of mind and adherence to procedural requirements set by law, particularly regarding the necessity for inquiry.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
