Jharkhand High Court
Awdhesh Dhanuk vs The State Of Jharkhand on 25 January, 2017
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No. 9829 of 2016
Awdhesh Dhanuk ...Petitioner
-V e r s u s-
The State of Jharkhand ...Opp.Party
CORAM: - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
For the Petitioner : - Ms. Renu Bala, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. Pankaj Kumar, A.P.P.
03/25.01.2017Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 147/148/149/353/307 of the Indian Penal Code, 27 of the Arms Act and also under Section 17 of C.L.A. Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged. Though the petitioner has been named in the F.I.R. but he has been implicated in the present case merely on the basis of suspicion. It is alleged that the petitioner along with other co-accused persons, who are the members of a prohibited extremist organization, have burnt the house of one Rabindra Yadav, who is also a member of an extremist organization. The police reached the place of occurrence where exchange of fire took place between the police party and the extremists. However, all the members of the said extremist organization succeeded in fleeing away from the place of occurrence. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that even if the content of the F.I.R. is taken to be true, it will appear that no member of the police party got injured in the said incidence. Other co-accused persons namely Rajesh Ram Bhuiyan, Shiv Shankar Kumar Yadav @ Lacchuman Jee and Sunil Mochi, and Yugesh Yadav @ Raushan Jee have already been granted regular bail by different Benches of this Court vide orders dated 15.05.2014, 14.05.2015 and 15.10.2015 in B.A. no.3140 of 2014, B.A. no. 1675 of 2015 and B.A. no. 7812 of 2015 respectively. The petitioner is in jail custody since 30.06.2014, therefore, his prayer for regular bail may be considered sympathetically.
Learned A.P.P. opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, 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 Additional Sessions Judge-I, Palamu in connection with S.T. no. 244 of 2014 arising out of Panki P.S. Case no. 83 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 1368 of 2013.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Ritesh