15 hours ago
Senior citizen sent to judicial custody when bail was norm, Jharkhand HC orders training for Magistrates across state
The Jharkhand High Court has strongly criticised a Judicial Magistrate in Hazaribagh district for sending a 66-year-old man to judicial custody in a case of a private complaint despite Supreme Court guidelines that mandate bail in such circumstances.
The High Court ordered statewide training for all Magistrates and Chief Judicial Magistrates to ensure compliance with Constitutional protections.
Local resident Baleshwar Rana filed a complaint before the Hazaribagh Judicial Magistrate (First Class) in 2024 against Ruplal Rana and three others, accusing them of fraud, criminal conspiracy and trespass.
The magistrate directed the petitioners to appear before the trial court, as the case arose from a complaint and not an arrestable investigation.
Ruplal Rana appeared before the Magistrate in Hazaribagh in May but was sent to judicial custody, with his bail application being rejected.
The Supreme Court's decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI — first delivered in 2021 and reiterated in subsequent years — says that in complaint cases such as these, accused persons who appear after being summoned should not be arrested and must be granted bail or interim bail on appearance.
Advocate Randhir Kumar, counsel for the petitioners, told The Indian Express that Ruplal Rana remained in custody for nearly 15 days in the complaint case until the summer vacation judge granted him regular bail.
He said: 'After the Magistrate rejected our anticipatory bail plea, we approached the High Court on April 21. The court said that since the case arose from a complaint and cognizance was already taken, there was no need for custodial action. Acting in compliance, Ruplal Rana appeared in May, but he was still taken into custody by the Magistrate, despite citing the SC's Satender Kumar Antil guidelines.'
'After he was granted bail, we informed the High Court on June 11 that the Magistrate had disregarded both apex court and High Court directions,' he said.
High Court Judge Justice Ananda Sen passed a detailed order on June 18 in which the High Court modified its earlier order to explicitly direct the trial court to accept bail bonds from the remaining petitioners upon their appearance.
The court also took note of a 'concerning pattern', noting that several Magistrates and Chief Judicial Magistrates in Jharkhand continue to act in disregard of Supreme Court judgments, including Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar.
'The Magistrates have not yet been sensitized, in spite of the efforts taken by the Jharkhand Judicial Academy. I am repeatedly coming across orders that ignore the Supreme Court's binding directions… it is most unfortunate that in the year 2025 also, the Magistrates are not in a position to understand and implement those judgments and orders passed by the SC,' Justice Sen observed.
The Court has ordered the Judicial Academy, Jharkhand, to immediately conduct statewide sensitization workshops for all Judicial Magistrates and CJMs.
The petitioners have now been granted relief, and the trial court has been directed to proceed in line with the constitutional safeguards reiterated by the apex court.
