D.K. Sinha, J. - (1.) THE record is put up with the Office note. By the order dated 02.11.2010 Mr. S.B. Ojha, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur was directed to explain as to why he did not proceed with the case after he submitted report to this Court on 01.08.2008. He was called upon to explain within four weeks in the backdrop that this Court by the order dated 16.05.2008 had stayed the further proceeding of Golmuri (Burma Mines) P.S. Case No. 184 of 1990 till 10.06.2008 and that such stay was extended till the submission of the report of the Judicial Magistrate. By the order dated 11.06.2008, the stay was not made perpetual but since the Trial Court did not proceed against the accused till submission of report, it was expedient to call for an explanation from the Trial Court. In compliance to the aforesaid direction, a report was submitted by Shri Taufique Ahmad, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur, who was the successor of Shri S.B. Ojha, Judicial Magistrate and the report indicated that he proceeded with the case in compliance to the direction made by this Court on 16.05.2008. However, the Judicial Magistrate intentionally suppressed and did not disclose as to when he succeeded the Court of Shri S.B. Ojha and what was the stage of trial as such a fresh explanation was called for from Shri Taufique Ahmad in this regard. The second report of Mr. Taufique Ahmad, Judicial Magistrate was put up on 16.12.2010. He was specifically asked to answer two points: (i) when he succeeded the Court of Shri S.B. Ojha and (ii) what was the stage of trial of G.R. No. 1861A of 1990 But he further avoided skillfully to answer though answering the second question, he stated that substance of accusation was explained to the accused, who was in attendance after splitting up the records of the absconders. The Judicial Magistrate was cautioned to properly answer both the questions and in that view of the matter, he was called upon to appear before this Court in person today on 05.01.2011. But the Office report, which has been submitted regarding order dated 30.11.2010 and 16.12.2010 indicated that the report of the Judicial Magistrate was already received in the Section on 13.12.2010 much prior to the order dated 16.12.2010. The report of the Judicial Magistrate, which was received on 13.12.2010 could not be placed on record on account of inadvertence and therefore serious view was taken by this Court which reflected in the order dated 16.12.2010. The Section has further explained that since the report had been received in the Section on 13.12.2010 as such the order dated 16.12.2010 by which the Judicial Magistrate was called upon to appear in person could not be communicated and the staff of the Section expressed their regret for the inconvenience caused to the Court.
(2.) TAKING stock of the situation for consideration the personal appearance of the Judicial Magistrate is dispensed with. However, with the caution to Shri Taufique Ahmad, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Jamshedpur to be sincere in disposing justice and to remain particular if any question put to him in future. Let this order be communicated to the Judicial Magistrate concerned through the District and Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.;