Pramod Kumar Swain vs The State Of Jharkhand & Anr.

Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this interlocutory application has been filed with the prayer for early hearing of the instant Cr.M.P.

Since, the hearing of instant Cr.M.P. is taken up today, hence, this interlocutory application stands disposed of being infructuous.

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 with twin prayers, but at the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner confines his prayer only to quash the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Chierf Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Complaint Case No.436 of 2023 by which the NBW has been ordered to be issued against the petitioner by the learned CJM, Lohardaga even though the execution report of the bailable warrant has been issued vide order dated 01.02.2024 was not received back in the record and does not press the prayer to quash the order dated 13.10.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Complaint Case No.436 of 2023.

Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 13.10.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Complaint Case No.436 of 2023 is rejected as not pressed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the order dated 08.04.2024 has been passed without receipt of the execution report of the bailable warrant of arrest issued earlier, hence, the same is not sustainable in law. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to appear before the court below on or before 30.10.2026 and will pray for regular bail, hence, the prayer as prayed for by the petitioner, in this Cr.M.P., be allowed.

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer of the petitioner and submit that the very fact that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest goes to show that there was a sufficient material in the record for the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga to be satisfied for issuing the non-bailable warrant of arrest, hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P., being without any merit, be dismissed.

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court has no hesitation in holding that since the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga has issued bailable warrant of arrest vide order dated 01.02.2024, it was incumbent upon the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga to ensure that the execution report of the bailable warrant of arrest is received, but in the absence of the same, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga having ordered for issuance of non-bailable warrant of arrest on 08.04.2024 in connection with Complaint Case No.436 of 2023, hence, the same is not sustainable in law and is liable to be quashed and set aside.

Accordingly, the order dated 08.04.2024 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga in connection with Complaint Case No.436 of 2023, is quashed and set aside qua the petitioner only.

The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

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

In case the petitioner appears before the court below on or before 30.10.2026 as submitted by him and prays for regular bail, the court concerned is directed to consider the same in accordance with law, without being prejudiced by this order.