RAJ KUMAR GUPTA vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - V.S.SAHAY — Cr.M.P./1354/2026

Case under An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 74,75,308(2),351(2),BNS,8,POCSO,ACT. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 07th May 2026.

CNR: JHHC010126892026

CASE DISPOSED

Filing Number

Cr.M.P./8223/2026

Filing Date

16-04-2026

Registration No

Cr.M.P./1354/2026

Registration Date

02-05-2026

Judge

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Coram

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Bench Type

Single Bench

Category

WOMEN & CHILDREN ( 196 )

Sub-Category

Protection of children from sexual offences Act ( 14 )

Judicial Branch

Criminal Section

Decision Date

07th May 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

An Application U/s 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 74,75,308(2),351(2),BNS,8,POCSO,ACT

Petitioner(s)

RAJ KUMAR GUPTA

Adv. ABHAY KR CHATURVEDY,RAJESH KR SINGH,RAJESH KR SINGH, ,ASHISH KUMAR SINHA,HADISH ANSARI,RAJESH KR SINGH

Respondent(s)

THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Advocate - V.S.SAHAY

Hearing History

Judge: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

07-05-2026

Fresh Filing (Admission)

Orders

07-05-2026
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed Raj Kumar Gupta's petition and quashed the Special Judge's proclamation order under Section 82 Cr.P.C. The court held that the Special Judge committed grave illegality by issuing the proclamation without: (1) recording satisfaction that the accused was absconding/concealing himself, and (2) specifying the time and place for the accused's appearance—both mandatory statutory requirements. The court directed the Special Judge 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

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed Raj Kumar Gupta's petition and quashed the Special Judge's proclamation order under Section 82 Cr.P.C. The court held that the Special Judge committed grave illegality by issuing the proclamation without: (1) recording satisfaction that the accused was absconding/concealing himself, and (2) specifying the time and place for the accused's appearance—both mandatory statutory requirements. The court directed the Special Judge 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

Explore other courts

Search Another Case