UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Absence of Material to Suggest Evasion of Arrest Renders Non-Bailable Warrant Unsustainable”: Jharkhand High Court Sets Aside Orders Against Julekha Khatoon

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Jharkhand High Court, under the bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Choudhary, quashed three pivotal orders against Julekha Khatoon, including a non-bailable warrant. The Court highlighted the lack of evidence indicating the petitioner’s evasion of arrest and non-fulfillment of mandatory legal prerequisites.

The petition, Cr.M.P. No. 4551 of 2022, was filed by Julekha Khatoon against the State of Jharkhand. It challenged the legality of the orders dated January 4, 2016, February 23, 2016, and March 31, 2016, issued by the learned SDJM, Dhanbad, which involved a non-bailable warrant, a proclamation under Section 82, and an order for attachment of property under Section 83 of the Cr.P.C.

Justice Choudhary scrutinized the submissions and underlying facts. He notably observed, “There is absolutely no material in the record, to suggest that the petitioner is evading his arrest.” Regarding the issuance of the proclamation under Section 82, the Court underscored the necessity of recording satisfaction that the accused is absconding or concealing to evade arrest, which was absent. The order for property attachment was also found legally infirm due to the lack of a detailed description of the property and absence of recorded reasons.

The judgment revolved around the procedural and substantive aspects of Sections 73, 82, and 83 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), emphasizing stringent adherence to legal norms before issuing warrants, proclamations, or attachment orders.

Decision: Justice Choudhary annulled all three challenged orders, citing their unsustainable nature in law, and instructed the lower court to reissue orders in compliance with legal standards.

Date of Decision: January 5, 2024.

Julekha Khatoon vs. The State of Jharkhand

 

Latest Legal News