LALITA DEVI vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PANKAJ KUMAR — Cr.M.P./681/2026

Case under An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528. Disposed: Contested--Disposed Off on 05th May 2026.

CNR: JHHC010043962026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

Cr.M.P./2990/2026

Filing Date

05-02-2026

Registration No

Cr.M.P./681/2026

Registration Date

16-03-2026

Judge

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Coram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

Quashing Matter ( 206 )

Sub-Category

Quashing of Order ( 6 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

05th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Disposed Off

Acts & Sections

An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528

Petitioner(s)

LALITA DEVI

Adv. GAUTAM KUMAR,BIRAT KUMAR,BIRAT KUMAR, ,ASHUTOSH KUMAR SINHA,BIRAT KUMAR

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - PANKAJ KUMAR

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

12-03-2026

LAWAZIMA

19-03-2026

Fresh Filing (Admission)

27-04-2026

Admission

20-04-2026

Admission

13-04-2026

Admission

Orders

19-03-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
27-04-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
05-05-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
05-05-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Summary: The Jharkhand High Court quashed a Section 82 CrPC proclamation order dated 07.01.2025 issued against petitioner Lalita Devi, finding the JMFC committed grave illegality by failing to record satisfaction that the accused was absconding and failing to specify a time and place for her appearance in the proclamation order itself—both mandatory requirements under settled law. The court directed the JMFC to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The Jharkhand High Court quashed a Section 82 CrPC proclamation order dated 07.01.2025 issued against petitioner Lalita Devi, finding the JMFC committed grave illegality by failing to record satisfaction that the accused was absconding and failing to specify a time and place for her appearance in the proclamation order itself—both mandatory requirements under settled law. The court directed the JMFC to pass a fresh order in accordance with law. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 All acts →

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case