Vinay Kumar Saw Alias Vinay Shah vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 September, 2014

[Cites 5, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Vinay Kumar Saw Alias Vinay Shah vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 September, 2014

Bench: P.P.Bhatt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                           A.B.A. No. 1302 of 2014

       Vinay Kumar Saw @ Vinay Shah       ........                   Petitioner
                                         Versus
       The State of Jharkhand                               ......     Opp. Party
                                   ---
       CORAM:      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

       For the Petitioner     : M/s A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Adv., Anurag Kashyap
                                and Lina Shakti, Advocates.
       For the Opp. Party     : A.P.P.
                                 - --
02/20.09.2014

The present anticipatory bail application is filed under Sections 438 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail as the petitioner is having reasonable apprehension of his arrest in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 337 of 2014 for the alleged offence punishable under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 137 of the Electricity Act, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and perused the F.I.R. and other papers annexed to this application.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused and except the confessional statement, there is no cogent evidence on record against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the co-accused persons have been granted regular bail by the learned court below but the bail of the petitioner has been rejected though the case of the petitioner stands on better footing .

The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner but has not disputed the fact that the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused, who have already been granted regular bail by the learned court below.

Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the present case, more particularly, in view of the fact that the co-accused persons have been granted regular bail by the learned court below, this court is of the view that the anticipatory bail is required to be granted in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, in the event of his arrest or surrender within two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on executing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 23 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No. 337 of 2014, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(P.P. Bhatt, J.) Anu/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Jharkhand High Court