TEJ BAHADUR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for quashing entire criminal proceeding in connection with Khunti P.S.Case no. 3/1976 corresponding to G.R.No. 409/76 under sections 409/120 B of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri S.K.Choudhary, A.C.J.M. Khunti. Petitioner further pray for quashing the order dated 20.1.2000 whereby and where under petitioner had been declared absconder.

(2.) IT is submitted that occurrence took place in between 09/01/1970 and 12/12/1974. But the F. I. R. was lodged on 12.10.1976. Thereafter, charge -sheet submitted on 12.01.1984 and cognizance of the offence had been taken on the same day. It appears that thereafter, petitioner and other co - accused appeared before the Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti. The Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunt vide order dated 20.09.1986 committed the case to the Court of Sessions. Petitioners were granted bail till their appearance before the Sessions Judge. Thereafter, records sent to the court of Addl. Sessions Judge,Khunti. It further appears that out of four accused persons only one accused namely, Sadanand Singh appeared before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Khunti and remaining three accused persons, including present petitioner, had not appeared. Accordingly, learned Addl. Sessions Judge issued warrants of arrest and process under sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C against the petitioners. Inspite of issuance of warrants of arrest and process under section 82 and 83 of the Cr. P.C., petitioner did not appear. Thus, learned Addl. Sessions Judge,Khunti declared the petitioner absconder and split up the case of Sadanand Singh from the case of present petitioner.

(3.) ON the other hand, Sri Rangan Mukhopadhayay, learned S.C.II submits that it is clear from the record that the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 20.09.86 in presence of petitioner. But inspite of direction given by the Committing Court, petitioner did not appear before the Addl. Sessions Judge,Khunti for about 14 years i.e. till 20.01.2000. Thus, from 20.09.1986 to 20.01.2000, case was pending because of absence of petitioner. He further submits that till the date of filing of present criminal writ petition i.e. 26.04.2002 petitioner had not appeared before the Addl. Sessions Judge,Khunti. Accordingly, it is submitted that petitioner himself responsible for delay of the trial. Under the said circumstance, entire criminal proceeding cannot be quashed on the ground of delay. So far order dated 20.01.2000 is concerned, it is submitted by Standing Counsel No. II that the learned court below rightly declared petitioner as absconder because inspite of knowledge that the case has been committed to the Court of Sessions, he did not appear. Thus, petitioner deliberately remain absence in the court below.