Jharkhand High Court
Jayram Yadav Alias Arun Yadav vs The State Of Jharkhand on 14 September, 2016
Author: Amitav K. Gupta
Bench: Amitav K. Gupta
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.5214 of 2016
Jayram Yadav @ Arun Yadav ..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. S. P. Sinha, Advocate
For the State : A.P.P
---------
th
03/Dated: 14 September, 2016
The petitioner has been made an accused for the offence
registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 302, 307,
353, 427, 422, 425, 329, 435, 379, 171, 120(B) of the Indian
Penal Code, under Section 27 of the Arms Act, under Sections 3,
4, 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, under Section 17 of the
Criminal Law Amendment Act and under Sections 38, 39 of the
U.A.P Act.
2. Learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner has
been made an accused on the allegation that the extremists
were calling each other by names and the petitioner's name was
also called out. That the petitioner is in custody since
10.09.2015. That on similar allegation co-accused namely, Surendra Korwa, Birendra Singh Kharwar, Indrajeet Yadav and Nandu Singh, have been granted bail in B.A. Nos.2134 of 2014, 4888 of 2015 and 455 of 2016 respectively.
3. Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that fourteen police personnels were killed due to the land mine blast and the petitioner is named in the F.I.R.
4. Heard. It transpires that by order dated 22.07.2016 case diary was called for, but till date the same has not been produced by the learned A.P.P. Taking into account that in similar circumstances co-accused have been admitted to bail accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge - III, Garhwa in connection with S.T. No.369 of 2015 arising out of Bhandariya P.S. Case No.05 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No.160 of 2012, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall be present in the court below as and when directed by the trial court till the conclusion of the trial, failing which, the trial court is at liberty to pass appropriate orders.
(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.) Chandan/-