Jharkhand High Court
Kamal Mahto vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 March, 2013
Author: D.N.Upadhyay
Bench: D.N.Upadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1525 of 2013
Mukesh Kumar Choudhary .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr. Nilesh Kumar
For the opposite party : Addl.P.P.
13.03.2013Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Barhi PS case No. 326 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 366/376 of the Indian Penal Code.
The informant has alleged that the accused after giving false assurance brought her to Ranchi, and kept her in a rented room and also established physical relation. He has also sworn affidavit before Notary Public declaring the informant as his wife and took her home, but the mother of the petitioner did not agree and they also tried to set her on fire by pouring kerosene oil.
It is submitted that the informant is a married lady and she had enjoyed sexual relation with the petitioner out of her sweet will which is apparent from her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. No case either under section 366 or 376 IPC is made out. Only because the family members of the petitioner did not allow the informant to live in the house, this case has been lodged.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering facts and circumstances of the case as well as statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C, the petitioner above named 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Barhi PS case No. 326/2012 ( GR No. 4846 of 2012) .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1528 of 2013
Kamal Mahto .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr. Shailendra Jit For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Ichak PS case No. 102 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 143/353/369/427 of the Indian Penal Code and section 33(1)-b of the Indian Forest Act.
It reveals that tractor plying without papers loaded with boulders was seized by the forest official. The accused persons after forming unlawful assembly entered into the premises and forcibly took away the tractor after breaking open the gate of the campus.
It is submitted that three accused persons having similar allegations, who are named in the FIR have granted bail vide BA No. 7883 of 2012.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Since other accused persons having similar allegation are enjoying privilege of bail, I do not feel inclined to debar this petitioner from getting the privilege of bail.
In the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named 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 CJM, Hazaribagh, in connection with Ichak PS case No. 102 of 2012 (GR No. 1988 of 2012) .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1530 of 2013
Sarfuddin Ansari @ Md Sarfuddin Ansari .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr. Gaurav Priyadershi For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Seraikella PS case No. 51 of 2007 for the offence registered under sections 342/307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 27 of the Arms Act.
There is allegation in the written report that the petitioner and his brother-in-law Nayeemuddin were in search of Subhash. When they did not find him, Nayeemuddin caused injury to the informant by using gun. Seeing the people coming, they fled away.
It is submitted that the allegation of firing is against Nayeemuddin and he has been granted bail. This petitioner has been arrested in this case on 18.12.2012 and since he he is in custody. Charges have been framed and the case is pending for evidence against this petitioner.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Since petitioner is not the assailant and he was simply accompanying Nayeemuddin, I feel inclined to grant him bail.
Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named 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 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Seraikella, in connection with Seraikella PS case No. 51 of 2007 ( GR No. 344 of2007) on the condition the he shall co-operate with the trial, so that the same may be concluded at the earliest possible.
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1532 of 2013
Dwarika Sao .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr.Raj Kumar Pd.
For the opposite party : Addl.P.P.
13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Markacho PS case No. 67 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 498A and 494/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Petitioner has been prosecuted for causing torture and treating the informant with cruelty for want of more dowry. It is also alleged that he has arranged his second marriage with another lady.
It is submitted that the petitioner had been granted anticipatory bail vide ABA No. 3491 of 2012 with the direction to surrender in the court below on 8.11.2012 with the condition that he would keep his wife with dignity and care. Due to illness, he could not surrender on the date stipulated, but he surrendered on 8.1.2013 and since then he is in custody.
Learned counsel for the State/informant has opposed the prayer.
Since the petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail on merit and he has also remained in custody for two months for not appearing in the court below in time, I feel inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Koderma, in connection with Markacho PS case No. 67 of 2012 (GR No. 542 of 2012) .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1558 of 2013
Dilip Ram .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): M/s A.K.Kashyap & Lina Shakti For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Paton PS case No. 86 of 2012 for the offence registered under section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from fard beyan that the informant was kidnapped by six miscreants who were armed with rifles etc. The accused persons were insisting the informant to make a call to his family members to send money against his release. Due to arrival of police, the accused persons fled away and the informant was left near Jora Bagicha.
It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in FIR and he was not put on test identification parade. He has been implicated in this case on the basis of confession of co-accused Naresh and Santosh who were also not put on test identification parade.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and submitted that the accused persons have given inculpatory statement which is admissible in law.
Since identification of any of the accused has not been properly established by the prosecution, I feel inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named 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 CJM, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Paton PS case No. 86 of 2012 ( GR No. 1876 of 2012) .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1561 of 2013
Mukesh Verma .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr. Bijay Kumar Sinha For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Lohardaga PS case No. 277 of 2012 pending in the court of Principal District & Sessions Judge, Lohardaga.
It reveals from written report that some altercation took place between Subodh Verma and this petitioner on account of land dispute. In the meantime, the petitioner caused multiple injuries on the person of Subodh Verma with heavy sharp cutting weapon.
It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since July, 2012. Moreover, this petitioner lodged case against the injured Subodh Verma in the month of June, 2012 and that is why he has been implicated in this case.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. It reveals from the impugned order that as many as18 sharp cut injuries have been found on the person of injured Subodh Verma.
Considering above aspects of the matter, I do not feel inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, prayer for bail is rejected and this application is dismissed.
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 1565 of 2013
Balram Thakur .... Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY
For the petitioner (s): Mr. K.P.Deo
For the opposite party : Addl.P.P.
13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Merarma PS case No. 201 of 2012 for the offence registered under sections 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from written report that the petitioner on some pretext or other realized Rs. 64,000/- from four beneficiaries to whom Indira Awaas was allotted. In this way, he has cheated those victims .
It is submitted that the beneficiaries have withdrawn money from their account. As a matter of fact, they did not utilize the money and now they are making allegation that the petitioner has taken money. Petitioner is in custody since 13.12.2012.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering period of detention of the petitioner in custody, he ( petitioner above named) 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Godda, in connection with Meharma PS case No. 201 of 2012 ( GR No. 1452 of 2012) . Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. ............... of 201 ............... .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner is accused in connection with .................. case No. ............. for the offence registered under sections .......... of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from ................
It is submitted that ..................... Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named 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 ................. in connection with .........case No. ................ .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. ............... of 201 ............... .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand & another ... Opposite Parties Coram : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 13.03.2013 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. Petitioner is accused in connection with .................. case No. ............. for the offence registered under sections .......... of the Indian Penal Code. It reveals from ................
It is submitted that ..................... Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering above aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named 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 ................. in connection with .........case No. ................ .
Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)