High CourtsSingle Bench

Ashutosh Tiwary vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 10 June 2026 · Citation: (2026) 06 JH CK 0604

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — Section 84, 528, 531 · Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 82
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.1587 Of 2026
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 405 words

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

1.

Heard the parties.

2.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 inter alia with twin prayers but at the outset it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner does not press the prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 by which Non-Bailable Warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner.

3.

Accordingly, the prayer to quash the order dated 13.03.2026 is rejected as not pressed.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner confines his prayer to quash the order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad has issued process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. Though the said provision has been repealed by Section 531 of the B.N.S.S, 2023 and the case was instituted in the year 2026 when the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 was no more in force. Hence, it is submitted that the prayer as prayed for in this Cr.M.P. be allowed.

5.

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer and submits that the impugned order be treated as having been passed under Section 84 of the B.N.S.S., 2023. Hence, it is submitted that this Cr.M.P. being without any merit be dismissed.

6.

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, this Court has no hesitation in holding that since the F.I.R. was registered on 12.02.2026. Hence, the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Dhanbad ought not have exercised the power under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. while passing the impugned order dated 30.04.2026 in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026.

7.

Accordingly, the said order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is not sustainable in law, hence the same is liable to be quashed and set aside.

8.

Accordingly, the said order dated 30.04.2026 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Dhanbad (Mahila) P.S. Case No. 05 of 2026 is quashed and set aside.

9.

The learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad may pass a fresh order in accordance with law.

10.

In the result, this Cr.M.P. stands allowed to the aforesaid extent.