JUDGMENT :

Ajay Kumar Gupta, J:

1. This revisional application has been filed by the Petitioners under Sections 397/401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 17.06.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Purulia in connection with G.R. Case No. 384/2022 arising out of Balarampur Police Station Case No. 32/2022 dated 19.02.2022 under Sections 498A/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, whereby the learned Magistrate issued order of proclamation and attachment simultaneously against the present petitioners.

2. Petitioners’ case, in brief, is that Balarampur Police Station Case No. 32/2022 dated 19.02.2022 was registered under Sections 498A/302/34 on the basis of complaint lodged by one Ajit Mahato to the effect that his daughter, namely, Tusu Mahato was married to one Bimal Mahato on 5th Day of Baisakh last year. He received a telephonic intimation from his son-in-law that his daughter has no more. Immediately he and others rushed to the matrimonial house of his daughter where they were informed that dead body of his daughter has been sent for post mortem examination at Purulia. It was his firm belief that son-in-law along with others including the present petitioners strangulated his daughter resulting her death.

3. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 498A/306/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners and two others, namely, Bimal Mahato and Arjun @ Puintu Mahato. In course of investigation, two accused persons, namely, Bimal Mahato and Arjun @ Puintu Mahato were arrested on 19.02.2022 and subsequently they were enlarged on bail after incarceration for some times. It is further contended that in view of the prayer made by the investigating officer warrant of arrest was issued on 07.05.2022 against the present petitioners. But without receiving execution report of W/A, the learned Court below further issued warrant of arrest, proclamation and attachment simultaneously on 17.06.2022 against the present petitioners is not sustainable in law. Therefore, the impugned order is perverse and bad in law. Warrant of arrest, proclamation and attachment against the present petitioners could not be issued simultaneously. Therefore, order dated 17.06.2022 is liable to be set aside.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners further relied on a judgment reported in Inder Mohan Goswami & Anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal & Ors., (2008) 1 SCC (Cri) 259 to support his contention that warrant of arrest cannot be issued without satisfaction that the accused are abondance and evading arrest and further submitted that the Court should be extremely careful before issuing non-bailable warrant as issuance of warrant of arrest involves interference of personal liberty of individuals.

5. In reply, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State submitted that the petitioners were evaded their arrest, absconded and concealed themselves as such the learned Court had no option when prayer was made by the I.O. to issue warrant of arrest. Accordingly, the learned Court below rightly issued warrant of arrest against the petitioners on 07.05.2022. Warrant of arrest could not be executed as the petitioners were evaded their arrest, absconded and concealed themselves. After receiving such non-execution report of warrant of arrest, the learned Magistrate rightly issued proclamation and attachment order under Sections 82 and 83 of the CrPC simultaneously after being satisfied. Finally, he submitted I.O. fails to arrest them, warrant could not be executed, the Court has to procure their attendance, took all processes to bring them before the Court. Coercive steps have been taken as there was no alternative before the Court below. Therefore, the Court below rightly issued proclamation and attachment after receiving non-execution report in respect of warrant of arrest as such revisional application has devoid of merit