Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

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