Jharkhand High Court
Mubarak Ali And Anr vs The State Of Jharkhand on 7 February, 2013
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. of 20
..................... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : Mr. .......... ,Advocate
For the State : A.P.P.
/07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections
of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals that
It is submitted that the
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts, above named petitioner is directed to
surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and
on such surrender he 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 the Court of in connection with
P.S. Case No. corresponding to G.R. Case No.
subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.)
NKC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 4545 of 2012
1.Munna Sonar
2. Rajesh Sao ...... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioners : Mr. Prabhat Sinha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 114, 448 & 427 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that all the accused persons, including petitioners, after forming unlawful assembly, while demolishing the boundary wall constructed by the informant, opened fire.
It is submitted that no one had sustained injury and the allegation of firing is false and fabricated. Coaccused Jitendra Singh has been granted anticipatory bail by a Bench of this Court vide A.B.A. No.4179 of 2012 and the case of these petitioners stand on the similar footing.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the facts and circumstances as it appears from the F.I.R. above named petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender they are 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 the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Ramgarh P.S. Case No.122 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1303 of 2011 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4546 of 2012
1. Bajru Sao
2. Sunder Sao @ Shyam Sunder Sao
3. Radhiya Devi ...... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioners : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999.
It is the allegation that petitioners entered in the house of informant and tried to assault her.
It is submitted that the informant and petitioners are Gotias and due to previous enmity this case has been instituted with false allegation. Some other coaccused have been granted bail.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Since other coaccused have been granted bail, above named petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Bagodar (Sariya) P.S. Case No.242 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.2013 of 2012 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4557 of 2012
1. Mubarak Ali
2. Jamaluddin @ Jamal @ Md. Jamaluddin ...... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioners : Mr. Md. Sajid Yunus, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioners are accused in a case registered under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals that the informant has been subjected to torture and treated with cruelty for want of more dowry.
It is submitted that petitioner No.1 is brotherinlaw (Bainsur) and petitioner No.2 is maternal uncleinlaw. The entire family of the husband have been implicated with general and omnibus allegation. Some of the accused have been granted bail vide A.B.A. No.4369 of 2012.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the matrimonial nature of the offence as well as grant of bail to other coaccused, above named petitioners are directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender they are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Hazaribagh in connection with Complaint Case No.740 of 2011 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4561 of 2012 Rajesh Manjhi ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 341, 323, 420 & 504 of the Indian Penal Code.
It reveals that complainant had given loan of Rs.80,000/ to the petitioner for repairing of the vehicle but the amount so paid to the petitioner was not returned. When the complainant demanded the money, he was assaulted.
It is submitted that it is a case of civil dispute and the complainant may recover the amount by filing money suit.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. It is admitted case of the complainant that money was advanced as a loan.
Considering the aforesaid aspect of the matter, above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender he 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 the Court of Manju Kumari, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bokaro in connection with C.P. Case No.34 of 2009 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4563 of 2012 Mahfooz Ansari ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. S.P. Roy, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 33, 41, 42 of the Indian Forest Act and u/s 2 of the Indian Forest Protection Act.
It reveals that the tractor was found carrying stone chips without paper and the said tractor was seized. On interrogation the driver disclosed the name of present petitioner and other accused who had hired the tractor for transportation of stone chips seized in connection with this case.
It is submitted that before the driver disclosed name of the petitioner and other accused, name of accused No.1 to 4 including the present petitioner have already been mentioned in the report. Thus it is clear that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. Accused No.1 to 3 have already been granted bail by learned Vacation Judge, Ranchi.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Since other coaccused are enjoying the privilege of bail, above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender he 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 the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Forest Case No.44 of 2008 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4568 of 2012 Shiv Prasad @ Shiv Prasad Gupta ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Nikhilesh Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 33 of the Indian Forest Act.
It reveals that the petitioner was allotted contract job to widen the road. It is alleged that the petitioner had extracted some plant, bamboos and bushes falling in the forest.
It is submitted that petitioner has been falsely roped in this case. He is not at all responsible for cutting of bamboos and bushes.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the nature of the offence as well as submissions advanced, above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender he 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 the Court of learned SubDivisional Judicial Magistrate, Simdega in connection with G.O.C. No.8 of 2011 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4569 of 2012 Razzaque Ansari ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Nikhilesh Kr. Chatterjee, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in a case registered under Sections 341, 323, 504 & 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is alleged in the written report that the petitioner and his associates assaulted the informant and also took away Rs.730/ from his possession.
It is submitted that allegation of theft is against Javed and rest of the sections for which the case has been registered are bailable. The story of theft has been super added to make the offence nonbailable.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the facts and circumstances appearing from the written report, above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within a period of three weeks from today and on such surrender he 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 the Court of Sri S.K. Maharaj, J.M. Ranchi in connection with Angara P.S. Case No.54 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.3897 of 2012 subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4574 of 2012 Gobind Rana ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in connection with Barkatha P.S. Case N0.90 of 2010 corresponding to G.R. No.2360 of 2010 registered under Sections 304B/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of the D.P. Act which is pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh.
It is alleged that the deceased was subjected to torture and treated with cruelty for want of more dowry by the petitioner who happens to be husband. Finally she has been done to death.
It is submitted that the fatherinlaw, who has faced trial vide S.T. No.480 of 2010, has been acquitted and the witnesses have not supported the prosecution case. The petitioner was not at all present at the time of occurrence in the house.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that para 89 of the case diary indicates that the deceased died due to poisoning and there was demand of dowry for which the deceased was subjected to torture.
Considering the allegations and nature of the offence, I do not feel inclined to consider the anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within three weeks and on such surrender the prayer for bail of the petitioner shall be disposed of by the Court below without being prejudiced with the order of this Court.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4551 of 2012 Narendra Kumar ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Mukesh Bihari Lal, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in connection with C.E. Case No.49 of 2012 registered under Sections 47(A) and 55 of the Excise Act which is pending in the court of Shri Abhishek Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Dhanbad.
It reveals that a truck belonging to petitioner was carrying liquor in huge quantity for which no document was produced.
It is submitted that petitioner was not at all present at the time of seizure. He has been falsely roped in this case. Actually the truck was being plied under the control of driver and he shall be liable for the illegal transportation of liquor.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Since the truck belonging to the petitioner was being plied with huge quantity of liquor without valid paper, I do not feel inclined to consider the anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the same is rejected.
However, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Court below within three weeks from today and on such surrender the prayer for bail of the petitioner shall be disposed of by the Court below on the date of surrender itself without being prejudiced with the order of this Court.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4543 of 2012 Sikandar Singh ...... Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ...... Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Prabhat Kr. Sinha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in connection with Barhi P.S. Case No.214 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. Case No.3500 of 2012, registered under Section 414 of Indian Penal Code, Section 30(i)B/C of Coal Mines Act and Section 21 of MMRD Act which is pending in the court of Shri Alok Singh, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Hazaribagh.
It reveals that a truck belonging to the petitioner was seized by the police while it was carrying Pora coal. On search it was detected that coal was packed in 400 bags and it was covered with a toplean.
It is submitted that coal was transported on the basis of valid document. The petitioner was not at all present at the time of seizure of the truck and he has committed no offence.
Learned counsel, appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail. Since the truck belonging to the petitioner was found carrying coal without valid paper, I do not feel inclined to consider the anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail stands rejected.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4544 of 2012 Md. Irfan Ansari ...... Petitioner Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Rashida Khatoon ...... Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Birendra Kr. Jha, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is accused in connection with P.C.R. Case No.29 of 2012 corresponding to T.R. Case No.1376 of 2012, registered under Section 341, 323 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act which is pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dumka.
As prayed, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed as withdrawn.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4540 of 2012 Jahani Mistri @ Ravindra Mishtri ...... Petitioner Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Sarita Devi ...... Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Arshad Hussain, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Issue notice to O.P. No.2, through registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week.
Till the next listing of the case the petitioner shall not be arrested in connection with Complaint Case No.25 of 2012 which is pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4549 of 2012 Md. Sahjahan Ansari @ Jahan Ansari ...... Petitioner Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Hasina Khatoon ...... Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, Advocate For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Shashank Shekhar Prasad, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Petitioner is directed to make complainant as O.P. No.2 Issue notice to newly added O.P. No.2, through registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week.
Till the next listing of the case the petitioner shall not be arrested in connection with Complaint Case No.164 of 2011, T.R. No.904 of 2011 which is pending in the Court of Md. Pahim Kirmani, J.M. 1st Class, Bermo at Tenughat.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4565 of 2012 Murad Khan ...... Petitioner Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Mrs. ShahidaMurad Khan ...... Opposite Parties CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N. UPADHYAY For the Petitioner : Mr. Pradeep Kr. Prasad, Advocate For O.P. No.2 : Mr. Manoj Kr. No.3, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. 02 /07.02.2013 Issue notice to O.P. No.2, through registered cover with A/D as well as by ordinary process for which requisites etc. must be filed within one week.
Till the next listing of the case the petitioner shall not be arrested in connection with Patratu P.S. Case No.32 of 2011 corresponding to G.R. No.414 of 2011 which is pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh.
(D. N. Upadhyay, J.) NKC