Jharkhand High Court
Santosh Bhuiyan And Ors vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 March, 2014
Author: H.C.Mishra
Bench: H.C.Mishra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A No. 379 of 2014
-------
Ravi Karmali .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Santosh Kumar
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
2/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No.214 of 2012, corresponding to G.R No.3536 of 2012, S.T. No. 618 of 2012, for the offence under Sections 395 and 412 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
In view of the recovery from the petitioner, the bail application of this petitioner was earlier rejected on merits by order dated 19.08.2013 in B.A. No. 4296 of 2013.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail submitting that the witnesses examined so far, including the informant, have not supported the case. It is also submitted that the I.O. has also been examined in this case.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Ravi Karmali, is hereby rejected.
However, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, if true, the Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 511 of 2014
-------
1. Tetar Jahan Bibi
2. Ismail Khan .... Petitioners
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioners : : M/s. Arun Kumar Dubey
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
For the Informant : : Mr. Anil Kumar
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for the informant.
The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Manjhiaon P.S. Case No.232 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.2649 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 498-A, 307, 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
The petitioners are the mother-in-law and father-in-law of the deceased and the F.I.R. was lodged by the deceased herself, while she was injured. She has made specific allegation against these petitioners to have put her to fire by pouring kerosene oil. It appears that in course of treatment the deceased died.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioners Tetar Jahan Bibi & Ismail Khan, are hereby rejected.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 10786 of 2013
-------
Jitendra Prajapati .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. A.Kr. Chaturvedy
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
5/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No.40 of 2011, corresponding to G.R No.505 of 2011, S.T. No. 166 of 2011, for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and he is in custody since 24.7.2011, but the trial has not yet concluded.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out from the case diary that the petitioner had been put to T.I.P., and was identified by six witnesses.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Jitendra Prajapati, is hereby rejected.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 11151 of 2013
-------
Moso Soren .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. S.P.Roy
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
4/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jarmundi P.S. Case No.164 of 2012, corresponding to G.R No.916 of 2012, S.C. No. 01 of 2013, for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner is the husband of the deceased and there is allegation against him to have committed the murder of his wife. The dead body of the deceased was found in the house of the petitioner with ante mortem injuries.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Moso Soren, is hereby rejected.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 12046 of 2013
-------
1. Santosh Bhuiyan
2. Jiten Bhuiyan
3. Sonia Devi .... Petitioners
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioners : : M/s. Pradeep Kr. Prasad
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
5/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Tatijharia P.S. Case No.17 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.1790 of 2013, S.T. No. 523 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 302, 328, 120-B, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to murder of the sister of the informant and the petitioners are the brother-in-law, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the deceased.
In the F.I.R. it is stated that the marriage had taken place about ten years ago and the deceased had three children aged about 07, 05 and 02 years respectively. It is alleged that the husband of the deceased was trying to marry another lady due to which she was done to death. However, there is allegation against the accused persons, including the petitioners, to have committed the murder of the deceased by poisoning. The dead body of the deceased was found in the house of the petitioners.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case and there is no eye witness to the occurrence of murder and the main allegation is against the husband of the deceased. Learned counsel has also submitted that the statement of the children were not recorded by the police and the independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but upon going through the case diary, has admitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence of murder and even the statements of the children have not been recorded.
In the facts of this case, there being main allegation against the husband of the deceased who wanted to marry another lady, I am inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Santosh Bhuiyan, Jiten Bhuiyan & Sonia Devi, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribag, in connection with, Tatijharia P.S. Case No.17 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.1790 of 2013, S.T. No. 523 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 319 of 2014
-------
Naim Ansari .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Pandey A.N.Roy
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
4/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Pandwa P.S. Case No.02 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.04 of 2013, for the offence under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
The impugned order shows that the petitioner has been made accused in this case on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no recovery from the petitioner and the petitioner was not put on T.I.P. Learned counsel for the State though has opposed the prayer for bail, but upon going through the case diary has admitted that the petitioner has not been put on T.I.P., and there is no recovery from the petitioner.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Naim Ansari, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Asif Equbal, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Palamau at Daltonganj, or his successor, in connection with, Pandwa P.S. Case No.02 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.04 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 483 of 2014
-------
Bhukhan Lohra .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Md. Ashrafuzzaman Khan
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
6/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Gumla P.S. Case No.398 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.1170 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 224, 225, 225-A and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
The petitioner is a Jail Official and there is allegation against him and the other Jail Officials of dereliction in duty, due to which one under trial prisoner managed to brake the jail and flee away.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Bhukhan Lohra, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla, in connection with, Gumla P.S. Case No.398 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.1170 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 484 of 2014
-------
Lumbha Munda .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Md. Zaid Ahmed
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
5/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Bano P.S. Case No.39 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.360 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 302, 201,120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Prevention of Witch Craft Act.
The case relates to alleged murder of the mother and father of the informant and from the F.I.R itself, it is apparent that the deceased were murdered sometimes near 16.4.2013. There dead bodies were found on 18.4.2013 and were cremated, whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged belatedly on 13.7.2013 by the daughter of the deceased, who found the dead bodies and the cremation was done within her knowledge, making omnibus allegation against eight accused persons, including the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail submitting that the bail application of the other co-accused has been dismissed.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Lumbha Munda, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Simdega, in connection with, Bano P.S. Case No.39 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.360 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 492 of 2014
-------
Prem Mahto .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Nutan Kumari Sharma
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Kotwali (Pandra) P.S. Case No.511 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.3145 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 302, 120-B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Section 27 of the Arms Act.
The case relates to murder of one Maheshwar Singh, who at the time of occurrence was talking to one Sanjay Singh, who was in an Indigo Car and the deceased was standing near a sweet shop. Subsequently, a sound was heard and the deceased was found to be in injured condition. Thereafter the owner of the sweet shop and other persons brought the deceased to the hospital in the same Indigo Car of the Sanjay Singh, where he was declared to be dead. The case was instituted against unknown persons.
Subsequently, the son of the deceased had named the co-accused Sanjay Singh, suspecting that the murder was conspired by him due to business rivalry between the parties. The petitioner is the driver of Sanjay Singh, who at the relevant time was driving the vehicle, and it is alleged that he also had the knowledge of conspiracy.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the said Sanjay Singh has been granted bail by order dated 12.02.2014 in B.A. No. 11985 of 2013 and the other co-accused persons have also been granted bail in this case.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Prem Mahto, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, in connection with, Kotwali (Pandra) P.S. Case No.511 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.3145 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 501 of 2014
-------
1. Anil Kumar Mehta
2. Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Kumar Mehta
3. Bablu Gope .... Petitioners
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioners : : M/s. Chandra S.Prasad
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.132 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.2623 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 341/ 323/ 325/ 379/ 307 of the Indian Penal Code.
There is allegation against the petitioners and the other co-accused persons to have assaulted and injured the informant. There is specific allegation against the other co-accused persons to have assaulted the informant causing injuries by sharp cutting weapon. So far as these petitioners are concerned there is only omnibus allegation against them.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Anil Kumar Mehta, Dilip Kumar @ Dilip Kumar Mehta & Bablu Gope, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribag, or his successor, in connection with, Ichak P.S. Case No.132 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.2623 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 10555 of 2013
-------
Tarsiyus Topno .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Mohit Prakash
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
5/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jaldega P.S. Case No.12 of 2012, corresponding to G.R No.104 of 2012, S.T. No. 137 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 341/ 342/ 379/ 427/ 302/ 452 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act.
The case relates to double murder and there is allegation against five named accused persons to have abducted the deceased and to have committed the murder. The petitioner is not named in the F.I.R.
The impugned order shows that some witnesses have named the petitioner also to be involved in the occurrence.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the witnesses naming the petitioner are only the hearsay witnesses. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State though has opposed the prayer for bail, but has admitted upon going through the case diary that the witnesses naming the petitioner have only stated that they subsequently learnt that the petitioner was also involved in the occurrence.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Tarsiyus Topno, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-1, Simdega, in connection with, Jaldega P.S. Case No.12 of 2012, corresponding to G.R No.104 of 2012, S.T. No. 137 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 10599 of 2013
-------
Suraj Singh .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Ashwini Kr. Upadhyay
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
4/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No.90 of 2011(S), corresponding to G.R No.1287 of 2011, for the offence under Sections 302/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the arms Act.
The case relates to murder of the brother of the informant and the informant is the eye witness to the occurrence. The case was instituted against five unknown persons to have committed the murder of the deceased.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused and there is no other material against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail, but upon going through the case diary has admitted that the petitioner has been made accused only on the basis of the confessional statements. It is also admitted that the petitioner was not put on T.I.P. It is submitted that there are criminal antecedents against the petitioner.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Suraj Singh, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Neeraj Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro, or his successor, in connection with, Balidih P.S. Case No.90 of 2011(S), corresponding to G.R No.1287 of 2011.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 1215 of 2014
-------
Md. Saddam .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Tejo Mistry
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No.159 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.1808 of 2013, for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code.
There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have committed rape upon the informant.
In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Md. Saddam, is hereby rejected.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 1174 of 2014
-------
Raj Kumar Mal .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Barharwa P.S. Case No.177 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.978 of 2013, for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to murder of the husband of the informant whose dead body was found. The petitioner has been named on the basis of suspicion as it is alleged that the deceased was having an affair with the wife of the petitioner, who happens to be the sister of the informant. The F.I.R. also shows that at the place of occurrence one knife was also found which was taken from the house itself.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only on the basis of suspicion and there is no eye witness to the occurrence. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has pointed out from the case diary that there is the confessional statement of the petitioner in which the petitioner showed the place of occurrence etc. However, it is admitted that there is no eye witness to the occurrence.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Raj Kumar Mal, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal, in connection with, Barharwa P.S. Case No.177 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.978 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 1210 of 2014
-------
Krishan Prasad Singh @ Krishna Prasad Singh .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Rohit Ranjan Sinha
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
4/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No.22 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.147 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 420, 409 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged that the petitioner at the relevant time was posted as Executive Engineer in Road Construction Department, Chaibasa, and there was bungling of huge amount of Government money in the construction of Hata-Chaibasa Road. The involvement of the petitioner has been shown in the publication of the tender as also it is stated that some work was done with the approval of the Chief Engineer departmentally, with malicious intention and for misappropriation of money.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and at the relevant time the petitioner was not posted as an Executive Engineer. The petitioner has brought on record the information sought under R.T.I., to show that some other Executive Engineer was posted at the time of finalization of estimate for tender. It also appears from the F.I.R., that there is allegation against the petitioner only due to the fact that part of the work was done departmentally after taking approval of the Chief Engineer.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Krishan Prasad Singh @ Krishna Prasad Singh, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West-Singhbhum, Chaibasa, in connection with, Sadar P.S. Case No.22 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.147 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 11975 of 2013
-------
Banti @ Kaisher Alam .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Parth S.A.Swaroop Pati
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
3/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No.134 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.2204 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 385/ 387/ 420/ 467/ 468/ 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.
From the F.I.R. it appears that the police was informed that the accused persons were involved in taking levy. It is apparent from the F.I.R. that the petitioner was not apprehended at the spot, rather the co-accused persons were apprehended and from them the money was also recovered.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Banti @ Kaisher Alam, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Satyakam Priyadarshi, learned Judicial Magistrate,1 st class, Hazaribag, or his successor, in connection with, Patratu P.S. Case No.134 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.2204 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 12051 of 2013
-------
Mukesh Munda .... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party
-------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA
-------
For the Petitioner : : M/s. Parth S.A. Swaroop Pati
For the State : : M/s. A.P.P.
-------
7/ 20.03.2014. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Adityapur P.S. Case No.62 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.264 of 2013, S.T. No. 157 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 395/ 412 of the Indian Penal Code.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
Though there is recovery from the petitioner and the petitioner was also identified in the T.I.P., but it is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the other co-accused from whom also there was recovery and was also identified in the T.I.P., has been granted bail by order dated 31.08.2013 in B.A. No. 6578 of 2013.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Mukesh Munda, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned 2 nd Additional Session Judge, Seraikella, in connection with, Adityapur P.S. Case No.62 of 2013, corresponding to G.R No.264 of 2013, S.T. No. 157 of 2013.
(H.C.Mishra, J.) D.S.