SULENDRA ORAON ALIAS SURENDRA ORAON vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Court
Jharkhand High Court







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr.M.P. No.2623 of 2026
------
Sulendar Oraon @ Surendra Oraon, aged about 33 years, S/o Suna
Oraon R/o Village-Katia, P.O. & P.S.-Bishunpur, District-Gumla
(Jharkhand).

… Petitioner
Versus
…
The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party

------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Kripa Shankar Nanda, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Shweta Singh, Addl.P.P.
------
P R E S E N T
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

By the Court:- Heard the parties.
2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the
jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with three
prayers but at the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner does not press the prayer to quash the order dated
st
23.12.2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1 Class, Gumla in
connection with Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of 2008 corresponding to G.R.
Case No.369 of 2008 by which the attachment order of the property of the
petitioner was made as by now no property of the petitioner has been
attached, accordingly, the said prayer is rejected as not pressed.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
confines his prayer to quash the order dated 30.06.2011 passed by the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Ghaghra P.S.
Case No.29 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.369 of 2008 registered
1
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


for the offence punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 436, 427 of the
Indian Penal Code & Section 17 of CLA Act whereby and where the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has issued proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the petitioner and to
quash the order dated 03.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Gumla in S.T. Case No.171 of 2013 arising out of
Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of 2008 by which the petitioner inter alia was
declared as absconder and permanent warrant of arrest has been issued
against the petitioner.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the order
dated 30.06.2011 is concerned, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Gumla without following the due process of law and without recording
the satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing himself to
evade his arrest which is a sine qua non for issuing proclamation under
Section 82 of Cr.P.C. which corresponds to Section 84 of the BNSS, 2023,
that too without fixing any time and place for appearance of the
petitioner, who is the accused person of the said case; has passed the order
for issue of the process under section 82 of Cr.P.C.. Hence, it is submitted
that the order dated 30.06.2011 passed by the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of 2008
corresponding to G.R. Case No.369 of 2008 whereby and where the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has issued proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be quashed and set aside.
2
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


5. So far as the said order dated 03.12.2013 is concerned, it is
submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that for declaring a
person absconder and issuing permanent warrant of arrest, it must be
proved before the court concerned, that the accused has absconded and
there is no immediate prospect of arresting him but in this case, there
being no material in the record to suggest that there is no immediate
prospect for arresting the petitioner, hence, the learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Gumla has committed a grave illegality in declaring him
absconder and issued permanent warrant of arrest. It is submitted that the
order dated 03.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Gumla in S.T. Case No.171 of 2013 arising out of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29
of 2008 being not sustainable in law, the same be also quashed and set
aside.
6. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State vehemently opposes the
prayer to quash the said two order and submits that the very fact that the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has issued the proclamation
under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. itself shows that there were materials available
in the record for the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla to be
satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such proclamation and
also declaring the petitioner to be an absconder and issued permanent
warrant of arrest against him. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal
Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed.

7. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after
carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is
3
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


pertinent to mention here that by now it is a settled principle of law that
the court which issues the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. must
record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the
proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is made, is absconding or
concealing himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to
issue proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. it must mention the time
and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself by which the
proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. As already indicated
above since the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has neither
recorded its satisfaction that the petitioner is absconding or concealing
himself to evade his arrest nor fixed any time or place for appearance of
the petitioner, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has committed illegality by issuing the
said proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. without complying the
mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not sustainable in law
and the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law.
Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 30.06.2011 passed by the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Ghaghra P.S.
Case No.29 of 2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.369 of 2008 whereby
and where the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has issued
proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, be
quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only.

8. Accordingly, the order dated 30.06.2011 passed by the learned Chief
Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of
4
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


2008 corresponding to G.R. Case No.369 of 2008 whereby and where the
learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla has issued proclamation under
Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is quashed and set aside qua
the petitioner only.
9. So far as the order dated 03.12.2013 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla in S.T. Case No.171 of 2013 arising out
of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of 2008 is concerned, it is a settled principle of
law that before exercising the power under Section 299 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, it is necessary that all conditions prescribed must be
strictly complied with; namely the court must be satisfied that the accused
has absconded or that there is no immediate prospect of arresting him, as
has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of
Nirmal Singh vs. State of Haryana , reported in (2000) 4 SCC 41 .
10. Now coming to the facts of the case, the perusal of the record
reveals that there is absolutely no material in the record to suggest that the
petitioner has absconded or that there is no immediate prospect of
arresting him. As the materials in the record suggest that though order for
attachment of the property of the petitioner was passed, yet no effort was
ever made to attach the property of the petitioner. In absence of any
material to suggest that the petitioner was absconding or that there was
no chance of the petitioner appearing in near future, certainly the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla has committed a grave illegality by
declaring the petitioner to be an absconder and issuing permanent

warrant of arrest. Hence, this Court is of the considered view that the
5
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026







( 2026:JHHC:25695 )


order dated 03.12.2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I,
Gumla in S.T. Case No.171 of 2013 arising out of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29
of 2008 being not sustainable in law be quashed and set aside.

11. Accordingly, the order dated 03.12.2013 passed by the learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla in S.T. Case No.171 of 2013 arising out
of Ghaghra P.S. Case No.29 of 2008 is quashed and set aside.
12. The learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla or his successor
court may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

13. In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed to the aforesaid extent
only.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi
th
Dated the 25 of August, 2026
AFR/ Abhiraj

Uploaded on 01/09/2026



6
Cr. M.P. No.2623 of 2026