Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    CR.M.P.-Case No.301 of 2016

    Uploaded by

    Somu Shekar
    The petitioner, Bimal Kumar Keshari, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in the Jharkhand High Court seeking to quash the order of the Judicial Magistrate that rejected his petition under Section 317 of the CrPC, cancelled his bail bond, and issued a non-bailable warrant for his arrest. The High Court quashed the Magistrate's order, noting that a Magistrate cannot pass a composite order cancelling bail and issuing an arrest warrant without first giving notice to the accused. The Court also observed that Section 317 does not permit bail cancellation and arrest warrant in a single order. The High Court set aside the Magistrate's order and restored the petitioner's bail status prior to the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    CR.M.P.-Case No.301 of 2016

    Uploaded by

    Somu Shekar
    21 views2 pages
    The petitioner, Bimal Kumar Keshari, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in the Jharkhand High Court seeking to quash the order of the Judicial Magistrate that rejected his petition under Section 317 of the CrPC, cancelled his bail bond, and issued a non-bailable warrant for his arrest. The High Court quashed the Magistrate's order, noting that a Magistrate cannot pass a composite order cancelling bail and issuing an arrest warrant without first giving notice to the accused. The Court also observed that Section 317 does not permit bail cancellation and arrest warrant in a single order. The High Court set aside the Magistrate's order and restored the petitioner's bail status prior to the

    Original Title

    cdd24ee2-6c4d-4a05-a973-a1e619722c6a

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The petitioner, Bimal Kumar Keshari, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in the Jharkhand High Court seeking to quash the order of the Judicial Magistrate that rejected his petition under Section 317 of the CrPC, cancelled his bail bond, and issued a non-bailable warrant for his arrest. The High Court quashed the Magistrate's order, noting that a Magistrate cannot pass a composite order cancelling bail and issuing an arrest warrant without first giving notice to the accused. The Court also observed that Section 317 does not permit bail cancellation and arrest warrant in a single order. The High Court set aside the Magistrate's order and restored the petitioner's bail status prior to the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    21 views2 pages

    CR.M.P.-Case No.301 of 2016

    Uploaded by

    Somu Shekar
    The petitioner, Bimal Kumar Keshari, filed a criminal miscellaneous petition in the Jharkhand High Court seeking to quash the order of the Judicial Magistrate that rejected his petition under Section 317 of the CrPC, cancelled his bail bond, and issued a non-bailable warrant for his arrest. The High Court quashed the Magistrate's order, noting that a Magistrate cannot pass a composite order cancelling bail and issuing an arrest warrant without first giving notice to the accused. The Court also observed that Section 317 does not permit bail cancellation and arrest warrant in a single order. The High Court set aside the Magistrate's order and restored the petitioner's bail status prior to the

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    www.casemine.

    com

    Bimal Kumr Keshari v. The State Of Jharkhand And Anr

    17 Mar, 2016 | Jharkhand High Court

    CASE NO.

    CR.M.P.- Case No.301 of 2016

    Important Paras

    JUDGEMENT

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 301 of 2016

    ---

    Bimal Kumar Keshari son of Jagdish Prasad Kesari resident of at Jairampur, Atta Chakki More, PO Jeenagora, PS Teesra,

    District Dhanbad (Jharkhand) Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Sarwan Kumar Saw son of Nandlal Saw, resident

    of at Koiribandh, PO & PS Jharia, District Dhanbad (Jharkhand) Opposite Parties

    ---

    CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

    ---

    For the Petitioner : Mr. Pratiush Lala, Advocate For the Opposite Party No. 1 : Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, A.P.P.

    ---

    5/17.03.2016 Heard Mr. Pratiush Lala, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Arun Kumar Pandey, learned A.P.P.

    appearing for the State. In this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 13.08.2015 passed by Sri B. Oraon,

    Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with C. P. Case No. 473 of 2012 which was registered for the offences punishable under

    section 138 of the negotiable instrument act and by which the petition filed by the petitioner under section 317 of the cr.p.c. has

    been rejected and his bail bond has been cancelled and non-bailable warrant of arrest has been ordered to be issued against him. It

    has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the learned Magistrate was precluded from passing a composite

    order by dint of which petition under section 317 of the cr.p.c. has been rejected and bail bond has been cancelled and non-bailable

    warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued against him. It was further been submitted that prior to the cancellation of bail of the

    petitioner, it was incumbent upon the Magistrate to have given notice to the accused and thereafter to have proceeded in the matter. It

    appears that by virtue of a composite order dated 13.08.2015, the Magistrate has issued non-bailable warrant of arrest against the

    petitioner while cancelling his bail bond and rejecting the application under section 317 of the cr.p.c. section 317 of the cr.p.c. does

    not -2- permit that the bail bond should be cancelled and non-bailable warrant of arrest should be issued by a composite order. In the

    case of

    Rajesh Anand Jha Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. reported in 2016 (1) JLJR 373, in similar circumstances this Court has held as

    follows:

    4. ..................It is abundantly clear that in passing the impugned order the court below has not adhered to the procedure of law. Thus,

    in the attending facts and circumstances, the order of cancellation of bail without issuing any notice amounts to curtailment of the right

    of the petitioner and is in violation of the principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order is not sustainable in law and

    is hereby quashed. The petitioner is directed to appear in the court below within three weeks from the date of this order and on his

    Printed by: Guest Page 1 of 2


    filing an application the learned trial court shall enlarge him on bail on his furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial court i.e.

    Judicial Magistrate, Deoghar in connection with Complaint Case No. 31 of 2009 (T. R. No. 220 of 2014). The learned trial court shall

    expedite and dispose of the case at the earliest preferably within six months from the date of receipt of this order.

    In view of the fact that the learned Magistrate was not empowered to pass a composite order as has been done
    vide order dated 13.08.2015, the same is quashed and set aside. The petitioner shall remain on bail as he was
    prior to its cancellation vide order dated 13.08.2015. This application is disposed of. (Rongon
    Mukhopadhyay, J) R. Shekhar Cp 3

    You might also like