Allowed

Saifulla Khan v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Sept 2014A.B.A./328/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed anticipatory bail to the petitioner apprehending arrest under the statutes relating to forgery and cheating. He was found falsely implicated as a student and son of a firm partner. The court directed release on specific bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of similar amount to satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa.

Saifulla Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 328 of 2014

¶2

Md. Saifulla Khan ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. S. Hamidul Haque, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------

¶3

06/ 03.09.2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 75 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 450 of 2009, for the alleged offences under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 379, 414 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶4

From the FIR, it appears that at the check post, some mining challans were produced by the truck drivers, and it appears that the mining documents relating to four trucks were found to be forged. The petitioner is not named in the FIR.

¶5

It appears from the impugned order that during the investigation of the case, the petitioner has been made accused in this case stating that he is the partner of a firm, namely, M/s. Dhanbad Iron Ore Conversion Works, and it also appeared that the consignment materials were to be transported to the said firm, on the basis of the forged mining challans.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the petitioner is only a student and actually his father is the partner of the said firm. The partnership deed has been brought on record, which shows that the partners of the said firm are Md. Nasim Khan, Md. Farooq Khan and Md. Sharfuddin. The petitioner is the son of Md. Nasim Khan. Learned counsel has submitted that only being the son of the partner, the petitioner had been made accused in this case. It is also submitted that though the impugned order shows that process under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C., has been issued against the petitioner, but the petitioner had challenged the said order in Cr.M.P. No. 1628 of 2014, which was allowed by order dated 22.7.2014 and the impugned order issuing process against the petitioner has been set aside. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer, but he has admitted that the petitioner is the son of the one of the partners of the firm.

¶8

In the facts of this case, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Md. Saifulla Khan. Accordingly, it is directed that in the event of his surrender / arrest, the petitioner, named above, shall 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 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa, in connection with Mufassil P.S. Case No. 75 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 450 of 2009, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶9

( H. C. Mishra, J.)

¶10

Amitesh/-

Saifulla Khan v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saifulla Khan 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

MD Shamim Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Parmeshwar Ganju Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Tribhuwan Singh and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Verma Alias Mukesh Verma Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Chandra Bhushan Tiwary Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Kameshwar Tiwary and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand