Jharkhand High Court
Mahadev Rakshit vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 14 December, 2023
Author: Ratnaker Bhengra
Bench: Ratnaker Bhengra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 7305 of 2023
Mahadev Rakshit ... Petitioner
-Versus-
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
...
For the Petitoner :- Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate;
Ms. Juhi Kumari, Advocate
For the State :- Mr. S.K. Tiwari, APP
...
07/14.12.2023: The learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned
counsel for the State have appeared.
The learned senior counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it has been clarified vide communication from the Superintendent of Police, Jamtara that apart from this case, there is only one criminal case against him of the year 2017. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that in the case of the year 2017, the petitioner is already on bail, therefore, this case may be considered in that light. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that name of the petitioner has only come on the confession of the co-accused, namely, Subal Dutta and such confessional statement made before the police has not evidentiary value in the eyes of law. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that the house of the petitioner was searched and from his house techno mobile android set, Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank ATM, India Post Payment Bank ATM card and cash of Rs.50,000/- have been recovered. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that whatever recovery was made from his house was made in his absence and that is why the authenticity of the recovery is highly doubtful and questionable. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that so far as recovery of techno mobile android set and Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank ATM are concerned, the same belongs to the wife of the petitioner. So far as recovery of India Post Payment Bank ATM card is concerned, no ATM has been seized and only passbook of the said Bank has been seized and so far as recovery of Rs.50,000/- is concerned, the same was given to him by one Dinesh Sahani for the construction of poultry farm. The learned senior counsel has further submitted that during the course of investigation, no any cogent evidence has come forward against this petitioner to show his involvement in commission of cyber crime and no person has come forward to say that the petitioner has ever cheated anyone in any manner. The learned counsel has further submitted that the petitioner is engaged in poultry business and is also a farmer. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.
Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the anticipatory bail application and has submitted that the name of the petitioner has come on the confession of the co-accused, namely, Subal Dutta and that from the house of the petitioner techno mobile android set, Jharkhand Rajya Gramin Bank ATM, India Post Payment Bank ATM card and cash of Rs.50,000/- have been recovered. Moreover, the petitioner has one other criminal antecedent of same nature.
Having gone through the case records and after hearing the learned counsel for both the sides, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the appellant and accordingly, the appellant, named above, is directed to surrender in the court below within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/-( Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Jamtara, in connection with Jamtara Cyber Crime PS Case No. 37 of 2023, subject to the conditions that (i) the appellant will submit self- attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his mobile number before the learned Court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the Court (ii) the appellants shall also remain present on each and every date of trial before the learned Court below unless dispensed with by the learned Court below and (iii) subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
S.B. (Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)