MOHD MOUNIDDIN Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this court under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashment of the order impugned dated 23.9.2010 by which warrant of arrest was directed to be issued against him after cancelling his bail bond.

(2.) THE petitioner was admitted to bail by the order of the court below on 10.8.2006 for the alleged offence under section 85(3) of the Employees State Insurance Act The petitioner remained in attendance either in person or represented through his counsel under section 317 of Cr.P.C before the trial court which would be evident from the order dated 14.7.2009.

(3.) HAVING regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that the records were transferred from one court to another court in quick sucession by giving vague dat es before recording ordcers.Even no communication was made to the counsel of the petitioner after transfer of the record and the impugned order was passed the first date of the receipt of the record.The impugned order therefore, cannot be sustained in law .Accordingly, the order dated 23.9.2010 recorded in C III 118 of 2005 is set aside. However, the petitioner is directed to file fresh bail bond to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned and directed to appear before the court regularly.