AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard Mr. Navneet Sahay, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shekhar Sinha, learned A.P.P. for the State.
In this application the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 06.03.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in connection with Telco P. S. Case No. 256 of 2016 corresponding to G. R. No. 3336 of 2016 by virtue of which proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. has been ordered to be issued.
It has been stated that co-accused who happens to be the husband has already been granted provisional bail subject to the deposit of certain amount and he has already deposited an amount of Rs. 7,50,000/-.
Learned counsel further submit that since the grievance of the informant is on the verge of being settled and since the impugned order dated 06.03.2017 does not contain any cogent reason, the same should be quashed and set aside.
Learned A.P.P. for the State opposed the prayer. It appears from the impugned order dated 06.03.2017 that no appropriate and justifiable reason has been given by the learned Judicial Magistrate before giving direction for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C.
In absence of any cogent and justifiable reasons, the impugned order dated 06.03.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in Telco P. S. Case No. 256 of 2016 is hereby quashed and set aside.
This application is allowed.
However, the learned Judicial Magistrate is at liberty to proceed further in accordance with law.
Let this order be communicated through FAX at the cost of the petitioner.