Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Jharkhand High Court

Nirmal Gupta @ Nirmal Kumar Gupta vs The State Of Jharkhand ...... Opposite ... on 24 July, 2021

Author: Kailash Prasad Deo

Bench: Kailash Prasad Deo

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
            [CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION]

                           B.A. No. 6515 of 2021

        Nirmal Gupta @ Nirmal Kumar Gupta            ...... Petitioner
                                    Versus
        The State of Jharkhand                       ...... Opposite Party
                             -----

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO (Through : Video Conference)

-----

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rahul Ranjan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tiwari, Spl. P.P.

-----

02/Dated: 24/07/2021:

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though there are some defect(s) in the bail application as pointed out by the stamp reporter, but he undertakes to remove the defects within 30 days after the physical court starts and prayed that bail application may be heard as it is a regular bail application of the petitioner, who is in custody.
Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the bail application on merits but with condition that petitioner shall remove the defect(s) within 30 days after the physical court starts.
Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Jamtara (Cyber) Crime P.S. Case No.48 of 2020, for the offence registered under Sections 414, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and under Sections 66B, 66C, 66D of the I.T. Act. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that though from the possession of the petitioner, VIVO Android Mobile Set fitted with JIO SIM No.81025 60280 was seized, but nothing incriminating has been recovered to connect the same with any transfer of money.
Learned Spl. P.P. for the State seeks some time to file a detail counter- affidavit.
Considering the same, State counsel is directed to file counter-affidavit within a period of four weeks with regard to material collected during investigation, recovery made from the possession or house of the petitioner. Material connected with regard to cheating, regarding statement of the victim or transfer of money in the account of the petitioner or his relative or any OTP -2- to their mobile shall be filed before this Court along with criminal antecedent report of the petitioner.
Put up this case after four weeks.
(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.) Sandeep/R.S