KUMARI PURVI Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, learned counsel for the State.

(2.) This petition has been filed for quashing the order dtd. 31/1/2022 whereby process under Sec. 82 Cr.P.C. has been directed to be issued against the petitioners in connection with Bankmore P.S. Case No.243/2020, corresponding to G.R. No.340/2021, pending in the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad. Subsequently the order dtd. 15/12/2021, by which warrant of arrest has been issued against the petitioner, was also challenged by way of filing I.A. No.3932 of 2022, which was allowed vide order dtd. 6/6/2022.

(3.) Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are charge-sheeted under the Sec. of bailable in nature and they are not charge-sheeted against the Sec. of non-bailable in nature. He further submits that the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad has refused to issue warrant of arrest against the petitioners vide order dtd. 21/1/2021. He further submits that the main accused is Badal Gautam and he has faced the trial and he has already been acquitted by the learned court. He also submits that the petitioners were not evading the arrest and they have already taken steps in view of remedy available under the Cr.P.C. The anticipatory bail applications have been rejected by the learned Sessions Judge as well as by this Court and, thereafter the petitioners have moved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court for getting anticipatory bail in S.L.P. (Cr.) Nos.00534 of 2022 and 000690 of 2022, which are pending. He further submits that when the offences are non- bailable in nature, there is no question of issuance of warrant and liberty of the petitioners has been taken that too when the order of the anticipatory bail applications are being examined by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.