Allowed

Sujit Biswas v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 May 2014A.B.A./180/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand considered an application for anticipatory bail under sections 438 and 440 CrPC. Noting the petitioner's role and similar cases involving his superiors, the court granted bail subject to joining a bail bond and sureties with the local Special Judicial Magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted anticipatory bail to surrender and join a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of similar amount to S.D.J.M. Jamshedpur within two weeks.

Sujit Biswas Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 180 of 2014

¶3

---

¶4

Sujit Biswas ....Petitioner

¶5

-- Versus --

¶6

State of Jharkhand ...… Opposite Party

¶7

CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P. BHATT

¶8

For the Petitioner(s) :- Mr. Ananda Sen. Advocate

¶9

. For the State :- A.P.P. 3/ 05.05.2014 Present application has been filed under sections 438 and 440 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking anticipatory bail as the petitioner is having reasonable apprehension of his arrest in connection with JugsalaiP.S. Case No. 431 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. No.3881 of 2013 registered for the offence punishable under sections 420/406/468/470/477(A)/408/ 409/34 of the Indian Penal Code now pending in the court of learned S.D.J.M.Jamshedpur.

¶10

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned APP appearing on behalf of the State. Perused the counter affidavit as well as FIR and other papers attached to this petition.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the alleged crime. It is further submitted that the present petitioner is a bank clerk and has acted upon instruction received from the Superior Officers and the superior officers namely Bideshi Lal,Sukumar Kundu and Pankaj Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by a various Bench of this court in A.B.A. No. 966 of 2014 on 1.4.2014,A.B.A.No. 571 of 2014 on 1.4.2014 and A.B.A. No. 182 of 2014 on 27.3.2014 respectively. It is further submitted that the case of the present petitioner stands on similar footing as that of the superior officers. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is a law abiding citizen and is ready and willing to cooperate in the

¶12

investigation of the case and shall abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this court and therefore, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned A.P.P. opposed the anticipatory bail application and submitted that the petitioner is named in the FIR and he had deleted the word deceased from the aforesaid dead account through his user ID and add the word either or survivor and therefore, looking to the role attributed to the present petitioner there is a prima facie case against the present petitioner having involvement in the alleged offence and also considering the gravity of the offence present petitioner may not be granted anticipatory bail.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present application and also looking to the nature of accusation and gravity of the offence made against the present petitioner and also considering the fact that similarly situated superior officers namely Bideshi Lal,Sukumar Kundu and Pankaj Kumar have been granted anticipatory bail by various Bench of this court in A.B.A. No. 966 of 2014 on 1.4.2014,A.B.A.No. 571 of 2014 on 1.4.2014 and A.B.A. No. 182 of 2014 on 27.3.2014 respectively, present petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, namely Sujit Biswas, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, is directed to be released on executing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned S.D.J.M Jamshedpur subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶15

(P.B.Bhatt,J)

¶16

Sujit Biswas v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sujit Biswas 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

Raunak Sahu Alias Ronak Sahu Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Mehrun Bibi and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

MD Jubair Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Manoj Agarwal Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Firoz Khan Alias Firoz Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Reena Devi and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand