The issuance of a non-bailable warrant and a proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. requires the court to record satisfaction that the accused is evading arrest/absconding and, specifically for proclamation, mention the time and place for appearance.

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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as the orders dated 12.10.2023 and 10.02.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad in Tundi P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 registered for the offence punishable under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 B of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad.

3. At the outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner does not press this Cr.M.P. so far as it relates the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings and confines his prayer to quash the orders dated 12.10.2023 and 10.02.2025 passed in the said case whereby and where under, respectively, the non-bailable warrant of arrest and process under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been issued against the petitioner.

4. Accordingly, the prayer to quash and set aside the entire criminal proceedings in connection with Tundi P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 stands rejected as not pressed.

5. The brief fact of the case is that on 12.10.2023, a prayer was made by the Investigating Officer of the case for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest inter alia against the petitioner. The learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad without recording its satisfaction as to whether the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest, has ordered for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest and vide order dated 10.02.2025, without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner, has ordered for issuance of the proclamation under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Inder Mohan Goswami & Another vs. State of Uttaranchal & Others reported in (2007) 12 SCC 1 and submits that therein the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has expressed the word of caution while exercising the power to issue non-bailable warrant of arrest. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has committed a grave illegality by directing issuance non-bailable warrant of arrest inter alia against the petitioner, without recording any satisfaction that the petitioner is evading his arrest. It is further submitted that similarly the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad has also committed a grave error by issuing the proclamation without fixing any time and place for appearance of the petitioner. Hence, it is submitted that the orders dated 12.10.2023 and 10.02.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad in Tundi P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 which is now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad; being not in accordance with law, be quashed and set aside.

7. Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the prayer for quashing the orders dated 12.10.2023 and 10.02.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad in Tundi P.S. Case No.65 of 2023 which is now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad and submits that the very fact that the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Dhanbad h