Allowed

Kashinath Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Aug 2014A.B.A./1062/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an urgency slip matter, the High Court of Jharkhand considered an application for anticipatory bail. The court allowed the prayer, directing the applicant to surrender within four weeks and furnish a bail bond with sureties to secure release from arrest in the underlying criminal case.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail upon direction to surrender within four weeks and furnish a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of similar amount.

Kashinath Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1062 of 2014

¶2

Kashinath Kumar ... ... Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opposite Party

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. L.C.N. Shahdeo, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.S. Prasad, A.P.P.

¶7

03/01.08.2014 An urgency slip was filed by the counsel for the applicant and therefore, the matter has been listed today.

¶8

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the documents on record.

¶9

The applicant is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 101 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 777 of 2014 registered under Sections 406/420/409/467/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant was working as Adhoc Computer Operator under the PHED Department. Six cheques for an amount of Rs. 8 lacs were handed over by one Rajesh Kumar to the applicant for encashment and on such allegation, the applicant has been named as accused in the present case. It is submitted that only because the applicant has encashed the cheques, his name has been implicated in the present case though, it is not denied or disputed that the cheques were signed by one Rejesh Kumar and one Md. Nazre Imam who were the authorised signatory.

¶11

The learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submitted that it was the applicant who has encashed the said cheques.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in the event of arrest of the applicant or if he surrenders before the trial court within a period of four weeks from today, the

¶13

applicant namely, Kashinath Kumar would be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Bistupur P.S. Case No. 101 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 777 of 2014.

¶14

Let a copy of this order be sent through FAX to the concerned trial court on depositing the cost by the applicant.

¶15

(Shree Chandrashekhar, J.)

¶16

Manish

Kashinath Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kashinath Kumar v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abdu Abid Alias Abu Abid Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ruksar Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Salkhu Murmu Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Phulchand Mahto and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

MD Badruddin Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Jaideep Kumar Alias Rinku Vs The State Of Jharkhand