A Magistrate must satisfy legal criteria before issuing non-bailable warrants and proclamations, including evidence of evasion of arrest and specifying time/place for appearance.

JUDGMENT :

By the Court:-

1. Heard the parties.

2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with a prayer to quash the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad has directed for issuance of non- bailable warrant of arrest and also to quash the order dated 05.04.2025 by which the said learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad has ordered for issuance of proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 involving the offences punishable under Sections 115(2)/ 118(1)/ 117(2)/ 109/ 76/ 303(2)/3(5) of B.N.S., 2023.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Section 75 of Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 empowers the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Magistrate of the First Class to direct a warrant to any person within his local inter-alia jurisdiction for arrest of any person who is accused of a non-bailable offence and is evading arrest. It is next submitted that the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad without recording any satisfaction that the petitioners are evading their arrest, by order dated 03.03.2025 has directed issuance of non- bailable warrant of arrest. Hence, the order dated 03.03.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 being not in accordance with law; the same be quashed and set aside. It is next submitted that so far as the order dated 05.04.2025 is concerned, in the said case, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad without mentioning any time or place for the appearance of the petitioners has issued the proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023. Hence, it is submitted that the order dated 05.04.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No. 02 of 2025 is also not in accordance with law, hence, the same be quashed and set aside.

4. The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer as made in this criminal miscellaneous petition and submits that the very fact that the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad has directed for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest and subsequently the proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., itself goes to show that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Dhanbad to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of the non-bailable warrant of arrest and the proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S. Hence, it is submitted that this criminal miscellaneous petition being without any merit be dismissed.

5. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that before issuing the non-bailable warrant of arrest, against an accused person in exercise of the power under inter Section 75 of the Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, alia the Magistrate of the 1st Class has to be satisfied that the accused person concerned is evading his arrest besides being involved in a non-bailable offence and in case the court decides to issue the proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., it is a settled principle of law that the court concern has to mention the time and place for appearance of the accused person concerned, in the order itself by which such proclamation under Section 84 of the BNSS is directed to be issued.

6. Now coming to the facts of the case, no doubt, the petitioners are an accused of the non-bailable offence punishable under Section 109 of the B.N.S., 2023 but there is nothing in the order dated 03.03.2025 to show that the petitioners are evading their arrest. Under such circumstances, this Court is of the considere