( 1 ) HEARD Sri Daya Shanker mishra Advocate for the applicants, Sri Raj kumar Khanna Advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant and Sri Jai Prakash, learned A. G. A. for the State.

( 2 ) THIS application has been filed on behalf of the accused challenging the orders dated 6-10-2004, 1-11-2004, and 6-1-2005 in case Crime No. 1156 of 2004, Police Station amroha, under Sections 307, 302 I. P. C. State v. Guman Ahmad alias Manna. The orders challenged in this application are in respect of the proceedings initiated against the applicants under Sections 82, 83 Cr. P. C. The applicants are the accused in a murder case. Initially the case was registered under sections 307, 504 I. P. C. Later the injured died and the case was converted under Sections 302, 506 I. P. C. The F. I. R. was registered on 13-10-2004 but the applicants have not surrendered till date. The order dated 16-10-2004 which is Annexure-1 to the affidavit, is an order issuing non-bailable warrants on an application moved by the Investigating officer that the accused have absconded and they are removing their movable properties, therefore, process under sections 82, 83 Cr. P. C. was prayed for. However, the learned Magistrate issued non-bailable warrants. Subsequently another application was moved on 26-10-2004 which is Annexure-2 to the affidavit filed in support of the application, wherein it was mentioned that the proclamation of the process issued on 19-10-2004 under Section 82 Cr. P. C. has been completed in accordance with law, in spite of it, the accused have not appeared, on the contrary they are removing movable properties and as such a request for issuing process under Section 83 Cr. P. C. was made. This application was supported by an affidavit filed by the Investigating Officer. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate passed an order on 27-10-2004 that since a surrender application has already been moved on behalf of the accused in which 1-11-2004 was fixed and in the circumstances, the application for issuing process under Section 83 Cr. P. C. was directed to be placed on the same day i. e. 1-11-2004 along with surrender application. This order was passed on 27-10-2004, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit. On 1-11-2004 the surrender application was rejected by the Chief Judicial magistrate for the reason that the accused were seeking continuous adjournments, on the other hand, the application under Section 83 Cr. P. C. moved by the Investigating Officer supported by an affidavit specifically mentions that the proclamation under Section 82 Cr. P. C. has been made in accordance with law. Publication in the newspaper has also been made, as such the Chief Judicial Magistrate was satisfied that the process under Section 83 Cr. P. C. should be issued. Accordingly the Chief judicial Magistrate passed orders under section 83 Cr. P. C. The attachment memo has been annexed has been annexed as annexure-6 to the affidavit to show that all the household articles including the utensils, gas cylinders, wooden doors etc. have been taken away. It was emphatically argued by Sri Mishra that a number of articles taken away by the police in the garb of warrant of attachment under Section 83 cr. P. C. , was not only that of the accused but all the other articles belonging to the other family members as well. The last order that has been challenged is dated 6-1 -2005 wherein the learned Chief Judicial magistrate has passed orders that the charge sheet against the accused has been submitted as absconder and since they have committed an offence under Section 302 I. P. C. as such the immovable property of the accused is also liable to be auctioned. In the operative portion of the order it has only been mentioned that a report be submitted by the Tehsildar Amroha regarding immovable property of the accused. The main argument of the counsel for the applicant is that on 16-10-2004 only non-bailable warrant was issued and no order under Section 82 Cr. P. C

Click Here to Read the rest of this document