JUDGMENT : ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J. Heard the parties. 2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with several prayers but learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners do not press the prayer to quash the order dated 13.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau in connection with S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015. 3. Accordingly, the prayer to quash and set aside the order dated 13.08.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau in connection with S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015 is rejected as not pressed. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that the petitioners confine their prayer only to quash the order dated 08.02.2016 in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015 by which the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been made by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj, and the order dated 08.04.2016 in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015 by which the attachment order of property inter alia against the petitioners has been passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj. 5. The brief fact of the case is that the petitioners are accused of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015 involving the offences punishable under Sections 341, 342, 323, 325, 307, 379, 504, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. On 08.02.2016, the Investigating Officer of the case filed an application along the execution report of the non-bailable warrant of arrest issued against the petitioners for issuance of proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj without recording its satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest, ordered for issue of the said proclamation. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj without recording its satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest, ordered for issue of the said proclamation. On 08.04.2016, the Investigating Officer of the case made a prayer for issuance of the attachment order of property under Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure but without recording any satisfaction that the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was ever made in accordance with law and without recording any reason, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj has directed for issuance of the attachment order of the property. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the orders dated 08.02.2016 and 08.04.2016 have been passed without adhering to the mandatory requirement of law, hence, the same be quashed and set aside. 7. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer of the petitioner for quashing the orders dated 08.02.2016 and 08.04.2016 and submits that the very fact that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj has issued the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the order of attachment under Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; the same goes to show that there were sufficient materials available in the record for the learned Sub- Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj to be satisfied that there is justification for issuance of such proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the order of attachment under Section 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 8. Hence, it is submitted that this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, being without any merit, be dismissed. 8. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that by now it is a settled principle of law that the court which issues the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must record its satisfaction that the accused in respect of whom the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is made, is absconding or concealing himself to evade his arrest and in case the court decides to issue proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it must mention the time and place for appearance of the petitioner in the order itself by which the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is issued. 9. As already indicated above since the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj has neither recorded its satisfaction that the petitioners are absconding or concealing themselves to evade their arrest nor it fixed any time or place for appearance of the petitioners. Therefore, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj has committed gross illegality by issuing the said proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, without complying the mandatory requirements of law. Hence, the same is not sustainable in law and the continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 08.02.2016 be quashed and set aside. 10. Accordingly, the order dated 08.02.2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015, is quashed and set aside. 11. So far as the order dated 08.04.2016 in connection with the said case is concerned, it is a settled principle of law that the court issuing proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may for reasons to be recorded in writing at any time after the issuance of proclamation, order for attachment of any property movable or immovable or both belonging to the proclaimed person. Now, in the absence of any material in the record to suggest that the proclamation under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was in fact made in accordance with law, certainly the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj committed gross illegality by passing the order of attachment of property of the petitioners; without mentioning the description of the property to be attached and without recording any reason in writing about the need for passing such order of attachment. Hence, under such circumstances, this Court has no hesitation in holding that the order dated 08.04.2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015 is also not in accordance with law and continuation of the same will amount to abuse of process of law. Therefore, this is a fit case where the order dated 08.04.2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015, be quashed and set aside. 12. Accordingly, the order dated 08.04.2016 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with G.R. Case No.1799 of 2025 in S.T. Case No.364 of 2019 arising out of Chainpur P.S. Case No.137 of 2015, is quashed and set aside. 13. The learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj may pass a fresh order in accordance with law. 14. In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.