GOVIND YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for the State. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was made an accused in a case registered as Pratappur P.S. Case No. 12 of 2000 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 189, 341, 342, 447, 504 of the Indian Penal Code in which the petitioner was on police bail. When the charge-sheet was submitted, cognizance of the offence was taken but thereafter summons issued to the petitioner. was never served nor warrant of arrest issued was ever executed and that even there was no report relating to execution of the process under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, still the court passed an order dated 18.5.2006 whereby the permanent warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued against the petitioner and the case was ordered to be consigned to the record room. Thereafter on 13.9.2012 a fresh order was passed with respect to issuance of permanent warrant of arrest and by the same order, record was ordered to be consigned to the record room. That order was challenged before the learned Sessions Judge, Chatra, vide Cr. Rev. No. 52 of 2012 which was dismissed.

(2.) Being aggrieved with those orders, this application has been filed.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel appearing for the parties and on perusal of the record, it does appear that without there being any service of summons, first warrant of arrest non-bailable was issued and subsequently, without there being any report relating to execution of warrant of arrest, processes under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were ordered to be issued. Again without having any service report, an order was passed first on 18.5.2006 and secondly on 13.9.2012 for issuance of permanent warrant of arrest and at the same time, an order was also passed for record being consigned to the record room.