Jharkhand High Court
Nayeem Ahmad @ Naim Ahmad vs The State Of Jharkhand on 20 August, 2018
Author: Anant Bijay Singh
Bench: Anant Bijay Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 5346 of 2017
Nayeem Ahmad @ Naim Ahmad ..... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. M. Somesh ..... Opp. Parties
WITH
A.B.A. No. 5797 of 2017
Neyamatullah Khan @ Md. Neyamatullah Khan
..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... Opp. Party
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
---------
For the Petitioners : Mr. A.K. Das, Advocate.
For the State : A.P.P.
---------
11/Dated: 20/08/2018
Both the anticipatory bail applications are heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, as they arise from the same F.I.R. i.e. Adityapur (RIT) P.S. Case No. 218 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 628 of 2015, registered under Sections 406, 420, 341, 323, 379, 120B of the I.P.C., lodged on the basis of Complaint Case No. 154 of 2015 filed by M. Somesh before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella-Kharsawan, which was referred under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.p.C. for institution of the case alleging therein that the informant is an old customer of shoe shop of Neyamatullah Khan (petitioner in A.B.A. No. 5797 of 2017) and Nayeem Ahmad (petitioner in A.B.A. No. 5346 of 2017) was empowered to made appointment in Qatar Steel Company, for which a candidate has to pay Rs. 75,000/- and on the assurance of Neyamatullah Khan, Nayeem Ahmad collected money from different persons including the informant, but neither the informant was sent to Qatar, nor money was returned.
Learned counsel for the petitioners while pressing the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner Nayeem Ahmad has submitted that Nayeem Ahmad resides at Qatar most of the time and he has no occasion to receive money from opposite party no. 2 and there is some dispute regarding the shoe shop between the parties and petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case.
-2-Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that so far case of Neyamatullah Khan is concerned, he is suffering from paralysis since 2003 and he is bed ridden and has been falsely implicated in this case.
Case diary was called for.
It appears that supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners.
Learned APP has filed counter affidavit. From perusal of para-151 of the case diary, it appears that I.O. has recorded the fact the he has visited the house of Neyamatullah Khan (petitioner in A.B.A. No. 5797 of 2017) and found that he is bed ridden since 10 years due to paralytic attack.
Be that as it may, I am inclined to admit the petitioner - Neyamatullah Khan @ Md. Neyamatullah Khan on anticipatory bail and he is directed to surrender in the Court below within four weeks from the date of this order and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the Court below shall enlarge the petitioner - Neyamatullah Khan @ Md. Neyamatullah Khan on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella, in connection with Adityapur (RIT) P.S. Case No. 218 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 628 of 2015, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.
So far, Nayeem Ahmad @ Naim Ahmad is concerned, there is allegation that he has received the money which has been supported by the witnesses in para-12, 13, 125, 126, 127 of the case diary. So, I am not inclined to admit the petitioner - Nayeem Ahmad @ Naim Ahmad on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner - Nayeem Ahmad @ Naim Ahmad is rejected.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.) Sunil/