GUNJAN KUMAR YADAV Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is directed against the order dated 5.9.2013 passed in Sessions Case No. 313 of 2007 by Additional Sessions Judge-III, Dumka, whereby and whereunder, an application, filed under Section 317 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner, was rejected after canceling his bail and then the warrant of arrest was ordered to be issued against him. Mr. K.P. Deo, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner was granted bail in the case. On the date fixed i.e. on 5.9.2013, an application under Section 317 Cr.P.C. was filed for allowing the petitioner to be represented through his lawyer, as the petitioner on account of unavoidable circumstance was not in a position to attend the court but that application was rejected vide order dated 5.9.2013 though in terms of the provisions, as contained in Section 317(2) Cr.P.C., the court should have given one more opportunity to the petitioner to appear but instead of resorting to that provision, the court has passed the impugned order which is quite illegal and therefore, the order is fit to be set aside.

(2.) Learned counsel in this regard has referred to a decision rendered in a case of Tarapado Ghosh vs. State of Jharkhand,2009 2 EastCriC 567

(3.) For better appreciation of the submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner, Section 317(2) Cr.P.C. reads as follows:--