Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI, J.
Ram Raj Paswan & Ors. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Opposite Party
Cr. M.P. No. 2014 of 2021
Decided On : 19-01-2022
Quashing of Process - Failure to Supply Entire Order Sheets - Section 82 Cr.P.C
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners filed a petition to quash the order dated 01.07.2021, which issued process under section 82 Cr.P.C against them in connection with a pending case at the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-XIV at Ranchi.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners were not named in the F.I.R, did not receive any notice, and were unaware of the case until the order dated 01.07.2021. The court also noted the failure to supply the entire order sheets despite requisition by the petitioners.
Issues: The issues revolved around the lack of notice to the petitioners, their unawareness of the case, and the failure to supply the entire order sheets by the concerned court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court set aside the impugned order as it found that the order was passed solely on the prayer of the I.O. without satisfaction of the concerned court, and non-compliance with statutory provisions under section 82 Cr.P.C.
Final Decision: The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was remitted back to the concerned court to proceed afresh in accordance with the law. The learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi was directed to inquire into the failure to supply the entire order sheets and submit a report to the Registry of the Court.
JUDGMENT :
1. This petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard.
2. This petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.07.2021 arising out of Itki P.S.Case No.31 of 2015 (s) whereby process under section 82 Cr.P.C against the petitioners has been issued and the case is pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-XIV at Ranchi.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have not been named in the F.I.R and they have not received any notice and they were not knowing about the case and all of a sudden by the order dated 01.07.2021, they came to know about the case.
4. Mr. P.D. Agarwal, the learned counsel for the respondent State by way of referring paragraph no.11 of the petition has submitted on 03.01.2022 that the petitioners have stated that they have applied for obtaining the entire certified copy of the F.I.R in connection with Itki P.S.Case No.31 of 2015(S) from the concerned court but for the reasons best known to the concerned court, only the order dated 01.07.2021 has been issued and they objected to that and it appears that the petitioners are hiding something from the court.
5. In view of that, this matter was again adjourned on 10.01.2022 for further one week as time was obtained by the petitioners for filing supplementary affidavit. Again the certified copy was obtained by the petitioners and only one order has been supplied to the petitioners.
6. The supplementary affidavit has been filed stating therein that the petitioners have applied for entire order sheets and only the order dated 01.07.2021 has been supplied. The requisite for the certified copy of the entire order sheets is annexed as Annexure-3 in the supplementary affidavit and the certified copy dated 01.07.2021 at Annexure-3(A).
7. It is a matter of concern as to why the entire order sheets have not been supplied to the petitioners by the concerned court whereas the requisition for the entire order sheets has been made.
8. The Court has perused the order dated 01.07.2021 whereby it appears that only on the prayer of the I.O. the said order has been passed and there is no satisfaction of the concerned court recorded which is one of the parameters of section 82 Cr.P.C to pass such order. The other statutory provisions have also not been complied as held in the case of “Md. Rustam Alam @ Rustam and Others v. The State of Jharkhand”, 2020 (2) JLJR 712.
9. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 01.07.2021 arising out of Itki P.S.Case No.31 of 2015(s), pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-XIV at Ranchi is set aside.
10. The matter is remitted back to the concerned court to proceed afresh in accordance with law.
11. The learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi shall inquire into the matter as to why inspite of requisition made for the entire order sheets by the petitioners, the entire order sheets have not been supplied and will submit report to the Registry of this Court which shall be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice on administrative side.
12. With the aforesaid observation and direction, Cr.M.P.No.2014 of 2021 stands disposed of.
13. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi for the compliance.
Failure to supply entire order sheets and non-compliance with statutory provisions under section 82 Cr.P.C can lead to the quashing of the process.
The right to fair evaluation in examination contexts necessitates that technicalities, such as signature issues, be addressed without undermining a candidate's opportunity for assessment, ensuring pr....
The main legal point established is the importance of providing reasoned orders in the decision-making process, as it facilitates the consideration of the application of mind at the time of passing a....
The court emphasized that Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, and applications to introduce evidence cannot be used to fill evidentiary gaps left by the prosecution.
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
