Jharkhand High Court
Sakir Ansari vs State Of Jharkhand on 4 August, 2011
Author: D.N. Upadhyay
Bench: D.N. Upadhyay
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.5132 of 2011
------
1. Kumud Mandal @ Kumod Mandal
2. Chandan Mandal........ Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Din Dayal Saha, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 147, 149, 325,323, 307,379, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the written report that these petitionrs along with other co- accused came to the informant and they were carrying three oxen and two cows of the informant. When the informant obstructed them, they assaulted the informant and his maternal uncle by means of lathi and iron rod with intention to kill them.
It is submitted that the informant did sustain only one injury over his head as there was no repetition of blow and the other persons sustained injuries on the chest, therefore, these petitioners had no intention to kill the informant. It is further submitted that other co-accused have been granted bail vide order dated 07.06.2011 passed in B.A. No. 1435 of 2011 by a Bench of this Court.
Learned counsel for the State does not dispute the submission. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Rajmahal in connection with Rajmahal P.S. Case No.222 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.428 of 2010.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5096 of 2011
------
Md. Tahir ... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... ..... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. M.S. Chhabra, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 386, 387, 420 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 34 of the Money Lending Act.
It reveals from the written report that informant had purchased a Television on credit from the shop of the petitioner. His A.T.M. was kept with the petitioner who had been withdrawing money from his account. It is also alleged that the petitioner got the account opened in the name of informant and withdrew Rs.60,000/- between the month of February and March, 2011.
It is submitted that as a matter of fact, the petitioner had taken friendly loan from the petitioner to the tune of Rs.2,50,000/- for which he had produced the documents. When the said amount was not returned, a legal notice was served and after receiving that notice, the informant has lodged this case. No case as alleged by the informant is made out.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner which finds support from the documents annexed with this application, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Chandrapura P.S. Case No.53 of 2011corresponding to G.R. Case No.508 of 2011.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 5095 of 2011
------
1. Binod Yadav
2. Uday Kumar Yadav @ Uday Yadav
3. Mukesh Yadav ... ...... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand .... ... .... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 147/148/149/ 323/325/307/379/353 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 33/42 of Indian Forest Act.
It is alleged in the writtten report that on 21.5.2011 at about 9.30 p.m. the petitioners were identified by the forest guard while they were carrying stones in a tractor. The forest guard tried to restrain them but could not succeed and they fled away with the tractor. When the informant and his party reached near the road to search out the tractor, they were assaulted by these petitioners and their associates.
It is submitted that these petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. There was no source of light during night and, therefore, identificatioin of the accused persons is doubtful. Furthermore, the story drawn by the informant appears to be false.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand)each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma in connection with Satgawan P.S. Case No.41 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.434 of 2011.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5093 of 2011
------
Basant Kumar Mahanta... ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... ... ...... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : M/s Sahilesh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 25(1-b)a/26/35 of the Arms Act.
It is disclosed in the First Information Report that the petitioner and his associates were arrested while they were assembled near Tin Plate Sabarmati Chowk and on search, the petitioner was found in possession of a country made pistol loaded with cartridge and his companion were also having fire arms.
It is submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since more than ten months and one of the co-accused from whose possession only cartridge was recovered, has been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Golmuri P.S. Case No.179 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1946 of 2010.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5086 of 2011
------
Sakir Ansari... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ........ ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 399/402 of the Indian Penal Code and 25(1-B)a/25(1-A)/26/35 of Arms Act.
It is disclosed in the First Information Report that after receiving secret information the place where the accused persons alleged to have assembled was raided and after that the petitioner and his associates were apprehended. On search, the petitioner was found in possession of a live cartridge of .315 and one razor whereas his companion were found fire arm and ammunition.
It is submitted that other co-accused having similar allegation namely Azhar Javed @ Chunnu who was also apprehended, has been granted bail vide order dated 22.7.2011 passed in B.A. No. 4698 of 2011 by a Bench of this Court. The petitioner has been in jail custody since more than two months.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Porahat at Chaibasa in connection with Chakradharpur P.S. Case No.68 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.135 of 2011.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5084 of 2011
------
Ashok Ram @ Ashok Kumar ... ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... ... .... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : M/s Mohit Prakash, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from the First Information Report that on 16.2.2011 at about 8.30 p.m., the deceased told his mother that he is going to the house of Gudiya and he would be coming shortly but he did not return back and on the next day, his dead body was found in a vacant land.
The informant has raised suspicion against involvement of petitioner and other accused persons who are relatives of Gudiya with whom the deceased was having illicit relation.
It is submitted that neither it is a case of last seen nor any eye witness is there. Save and except suspicion raised against the petitioner, no cogent evidence has been collected by the I.O. of the case.
Learned counsel for the State admits that no direct evidence as against the petitioner is available in the case diary.
Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.21 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.437 of 2011.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5071 of 2011
------
Angad Singh ... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... ...... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Agit Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 366(A), 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from the First Information Report that the daughter of the informant namely Duliya Kumari was having some relation with accused Arvind Kumar Singh. It is further alleged that Duliya Kumari has been abducted by Arvind Kumar Singh with the help of the petitioner and other accused persons.
It is submitted that the petitioner is the uncle of Arvind Kumar Singh and he has has no concern with the abduction of Duliya. He has been in jail custody since last three months without any rhyme or reason. The informant has simply raised suspicion with regard to involvement of the petitioner in the alleged kidnapping.
It is not disputed that accused Arvind Kumar Singh was having some good relation with the victim and both are missing from the date of incident. The petitioner is uncle of said Arvind Kumar Singh.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Putki (Munidih) P.S. Case No.04 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 165 of 2011.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5226 of 2011
------
Girendra Kumar Mishra ... ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... ... .... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Vishnu Kumar Sharma, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
03 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 409, 420, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from the First Information Report that the petitioner and other accused persons after committing forgery withdrawn the money from the account of informant and the petitioner was Rojgar Sevak at the relevant point of time at village Gurha.
It is submitted that co-accused Krishn Murari Singh has been granted bail by the learned Sessions Judge but the prayer for bail of this petitioner was rejected only because the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner was not considered by a Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that the petitioner has surrendered before the Court below and he has been in jail custody since more than one month.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer. Considering the fact that it is not a very specific case that the petitioner had signed the cheque or withdrawn the money with the help of other coaccused and co- accused Krishn Murari Singh has been granted bail by the Court below, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Rehala P.S. Case No.37 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1083 of 2010.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J.) Sudhir IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.------ of 2011
------
----------- ... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... ... .... ... Opp. Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. --------, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : A.P.P.
-----
02 /04.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections -------------- of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals from the ----------------------- It is submitted that -------------------------------- Learned counsel for the State Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, ------------ in connection with ------------ P.S. Case No.------------- corresponding to G.R. Case No.-------------.
(D.N. Upadhyay, J) Sudhir