The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for subjective satisfaction and independent judicial mind before issuing process under Section 82 Cr.P.C., as highlighted in the judgment in Raghuvansh Dewanchand Bhasin vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr.

In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 17.10.2015 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila whereby and whereunder process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner.

2. A First Information Report was instituted by the informant-opposite party No. 2 wherein it was alleged that the accused persons had made a demand of dowry and physical and mental torture were inflicted upon the informant.

3. On 26.02.2015 upon the requisition filed by the Investigating Officer for issuance of non-bailable warrant against the petitioner, the same was issued by the learned court below. In the anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner being A.B.P. No. 63 of 2015 there was an order of no coercive steps against the petitioner. The anticipatory bail application was dismissed on 16.09.2015 and, thereafter, on 17.10.2015 the Investigating Officer had prayed for issuance of process 82 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. An order was passed on 17.10.2015 itself in which the application of the Investigating Officer was allowed and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was ordered to be issued by the learned court below against the petitioner.

4. Heard Mr. K. P. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned A.P.P. for the State and Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2.

5. Mr. K. P. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that from 17.06.2015 till 15.09.2015 an interim order of no coercive step was prevailing. It has been submitted that a copy of the warrant of arrest was received by the Investigating Officer on 19.09.2015 but no steps were taken by the Investigating Officer for execution of the warrant of arrest and without any service report a perfunctory application was filed by the Investigating Officer before the learned court below for issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. which was allowed vide order dated 17.10.2015. It has been submitted that the order dated 17.10.2015 wherein process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. has been issued is bereft of any reasoning with respect to the subjective satisfaction of the learned court below. Learned counsel further submits that application made by the Investigating Officer for issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and the subsequent order dated 17.10.2015 allowing the said application were done in a most mechanical manner and in such circumstances, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.

6. Mr. Ananda Sen, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 while supporting the order impugned dated 17.10.2015 has submitted that the interim order which was passed in the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner was for not taking any coercive steps against the petitioner. Learned counsel has also submitted that there were sufficient reasons to suggest that the petitioner was absconding and in such circumstance the prayers so made by the Investigating Officer and passing of the order dated 17.10.2015 was within the realms of the provisions laid down in the Code of Criminal Procedure.

7. Mr. Kaushik Sarkhel, learned A.P.P. has adopted the argument of learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and has submitted that the requisition filed by the Investigating Officer clearly speaks that the accused was absconding and/or evading arrest and in such circumstance it was rightly prayed by the Investigating Officer for issuance of process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. and the order by which the said application was allowed does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality.

8. From the order-sheet which has been appended to the instant application, it appears that the First Information Report was received by the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila on 08.05.2015. On 20.06.2015 non-bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the accused persons and on the same date the copy of the order d