The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for judicious exercise of power in issuing warrants and processes, and the importance of balancing personal liberty and societal interest.

Invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the three petitioners have questioned the legality of the orders dated 30.05.2012, 05.09.2012, 20.09.2013 and 21.04.2015 passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sahebganj in P.C.R. Case no. 37 of 2010 whereby and whereunder the warrant of arrest under Section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short ‘the Code’), the proclamation and the Processes for attachment under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code respectively have been issued and the petitioners have been declared as permanent absconders.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts, which are necessary to be stated, are that at the instance of complainant-respondent no.2 Niharika Rani, a written report was submitted with the allegation that on 07.12.2009 at about 4 P.M., she was in her house along with her son, somebody rang the door-bell and when she opened the door, suddenly three persons, who are the petitioners here, pushed the complainant respondent no.2 and entered into her house. When the complainant tried to call her son, one of the accused Kailash Prasad @ Kailash Sah took out his pistol and put the same on the chest of her son and threatened not to make any hue and cry. The accused persons were in fact searching her husband and were using filthy languages that after solemnizing second marriage, her husband has disappeared and the moment they get her husband, they would kill him. The accused persons, i.e. the petitioners assaulted the complainant and her son with fists and slaps and took away one briefcase in which gold and silver ornaments of her daughter were kept. When her husband came in late night, she narrated the incidence.

3. It appears from the record that after examination of the complainant on S.A. and other witnesses, the learned S.D.J.M., Sahebganj finding sufficiency of material and the prima facie case against the petitioners, took cognizance of the offence under Sections 323, 341, 448, 380 and 34 I.P.C. and directed to issue summons against the present petitioners. It further appears from the certified copy of order-sheet of the court below enclosed with this writ application that summons were issued on 13.04.2010 and without waiting for the service report of the summons, bailable warrant of arrest was issued on 28.07.2011. Again without waiting for the service report of either summon or bailable warrant, the court below issued the non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioners vide order dated 30.05.2012. The petitioners were unaware of the pendency of this case and never received either summon or warrant and without waiting for the execution report, the process under Section 82 of the code was issued on 05.09.2012. The record of the case was, thereafter, transferred to the another court and the said court also ignoring the mandates given by Hon’ble Supreme Court in several cases and without waiting for the execution report of the proclamation issued under Section 82 of the Code, directed to issue process for attachment of the properties of petitioners under Section 83 of the Code vide order dated 20.09.2013. Thereafter vide order dated 21.04.2015, all the three petitioners were declared permanent absconders.

4. Learned counsel Mr. Kaushik Serkhel appearing for the petitioners submitted that though prayer has been made in the writ application for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding arising out of P.C.R. Case No.- 37 of 2010 but his submission is now confined to the arbitrary issuance of non-bailable warrant, the proclamation, process for attachment of property of the petitioners under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code and declaration of the petitioners as permanent absconders. Learned counsel seriously contended that the court below without following the mandates of the above provision passed the orders in a mechanical manner without applying his judicial mind and on mere perusal of the order sheet of the court below, it