Sanjay Mohanty vs Satyanarayan Mahapatra

Savitri Ratho, J

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

This application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 16.01.2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Puri in ICC Case No.249/2018 issuing N.B.W. of arrest against him.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has annexed some orders passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Puri. Perusal of the orders reveals that on 13.8.2019 the learned court below found that notice sent to him by registered post was back with endorsement that “absent” on five different days. As the registered post envelope was duly addressed and stamped, the learned court below taking recourse to Section 27 of the General Clause Act presumed the notice to be sufficient and arrived at a conclusion that the accused is intentionally avoiding the service of summon and accordingly the summon was held to be sufficient and the learned court issued bailable warrant of Rs.5,000/- fixing 15.10.2019 for production of the petitioner.

On 16.01.2020, advocate for the complainant filed hazira and as previous bailable warrant was not executed, the learned court below issued N.B.W. against the accused-petitioner fixing 16.03.2020 for production.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even though the petitioner has not received summon in this case nor police had come to the residence with bailable warrant, non-bailable warrant has been issued against him. He further submits that if the order dated 16.01.2020 is set aside and the N.B.W. issued against him is recalled, the petitioner undertakes to appear before the learned court below and move an application for bail and cooperate with the learned trial court for early completion of the trial.

Mr. P.C.Das, learned counsel for the opp. party submits that the petitioner has deliberately avoided receiving the summon because notice under Section 138 of N.I. Act which has been sent to him at the same address has been received by him earlier. As he avoided to receive notice, first bailable warrant and then N.B.W. of arrest has been issued against him and in the process almost four years have elapsed. He further submits that as there is no infirmity in the order dated 16.01.2020 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Puri in ICC Case No.249/2018, the CRLMC should be dismissed. He also submits that as the case is pending since more than 4 years, a direction for early disposal would be in the interest of the complainant.

Considering the submission of learned counsels, although I find no illegality in the impugned order, but in order to ensure the appearance of the petitioner in the trial court for expeditious completion of trial in the case, and as the petitioner is willing to appear before the learned court below and move for bail, I direct that if the petitioner appears before the learned court below on or before 15.03.2022, the learned S.D.J.M., Puri shall do well to recall the N.B.W. of arrest issued against him and consider his application for bail.

As the case is pending for almost 4 years, the learned trial court shall take steps for disposal of the case within six months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.

With the aforesaid observations and direction, the CRLMC is disposed of.

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted as per rules.

………………………