Back
2026 Supreme(Jhk) 324
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
Indrajit Chakraborty - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand - Opposite Party
Cr.M.P. No.3581 of 2023
Decided On : 09-02-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Cancellation
Act Referred
Headnote
Facts of the case:
Complaint registered per direction treating order under Section 340 as complaint. Accused appealed under 341, sought adjournment till appeal decision, directed to file order but did not. Lawyer later filed for representation dispensing personal appearance; bail cancelled for not providing appeal status despite prior last chance noted.
Findings of Court:
Impugned orders quashed and set aside; bail in complaint case restored.
Issues: Whether bail cancellation valid absent personal appearance direction, without deciding representation application, merely for non-furnishing appeal status; whether revision erred in upholding.
Ratio Decidendi: Settled principle - no direction for personal appearance and representation petition filed, ordinarily allowed; trial court could proceed absent stay but cancellation for mere non-information grave illegality; revision erred ignoring this. Enumerated illustrative grounds for cancellation not attracted.
Result: Criminal miscellaneous petition allowed.
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Sahay, Advocate
For the Opposite Party :Mr. Pankaj Kumar, P.P., Mr. Pratik Sen, Advocate
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delete deceased opposite party from cause title. (Para 1) |
| 2. complaint originated under section 340 crpc; bail cancelled. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. petitioner claims procedural error; respondents cite evasion. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. no evidence of bail violation grounds like tampering. (Para 6) |
| 5. must rule on representation plea absent appearance direction. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. quash orders for illegality; restore petitioner's bail. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
I.A. No.17360 of 2025
Heard the parties.
This Interlocutory Application has been filed with the prayer to delete the Opposite Party No.2 namely Kaushik Dutt of this criminal miscellaneous petition, who died in the month of October, 2024.
Considering the aforesaid fact, the prayer is allowed.
Registry is directed to delete the opposite party No.2 in the cause title of this Cr.M.P. and renumber the present opposite party No.3 as opposite party No.2 with red ink.
Interlocutory Application is disposed of accordingly.
Cr.M.P. No.3581 of 2023
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the order dated 13.07.2023 passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Revision No.213 of 2023 and also to quash the order dated 18.03.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in Complaint Case No.2314 of 2019 by which the learned trial court cancelled the bail granted to the petitioner who is the accused person of Complaint Case No.2314 of 2019 and directed to issue the non-bailable warrant of arrest against the petitioner.
2. The brief facts of the case is that the Complaint Case No.2314 of 2019 was registered on the basis of order passed by the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-X, Ranchi in Misc. Civil Application No.1068 of 2018 in which the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner-X, Ranchi allowed the petition filed against the petitioner under Section 340 of Cr.P.C. and sent a copy of order dated 02.05.2019 to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi with a direction to treat it as a complaint. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 341 of the Cr.P.C. before this court. The petitioner also filed an application in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi on 19.07.2019 praying to adjourn the case till Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.568 of 2019 is decided by this Court. The learned A.C.J.M., to whose court the case was apparently transferred: directed the petitioner to file the order of this Court in the said appeal but the petitioner did not file the said order. On 18.03.2023 in Complaint Case No.2314 of 2019, the lawyer of the petitioner filed a petition to represent him and to dispense with the personal appearance of the petitioner. The learned A.C.J.M. mentioned that the petitioner was given last chance for providing status of the Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.568 of 2019 but as the same was not produced the bail was cancelled and office was directed to issue the non-bailable warrant of arrest. The petitioner filed Criminal Revision No.213 of 2023 in the court of Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi and the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi upheld the order of cancellation of the bail of the petitioner.
3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no direction for personal appearance of the petitioner on 18.03.2023. The prayer for representation of the petitioner by his lawyer by dispensing with the personal appearance of the petitioner was filed. No order was passed on the said application by the learned A.C.J.M. as the learned A.C.J.M. neither allowed the said petition nor rejected the said petition but went out on to cancel the bail of the petitioner; which is not in accordance with law. It is next submitted that the prayer made before the learned A.C.J.M/ C.J.M, Ranchi on 19.07.2019 was in terms of Section 343 (2) of the Cr.P.C. but no order was passed
