Allowed

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

Jharkhand HC2 May 2014A.B.A./368/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a BBA student, in a case involving alleged offences under the Indian Penal Code related to a land dispute, directing release if arrested within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on executing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties if arrested or surrenders within two weeks, subject to conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

Raunak Sahu Alias Ronak Sahu Vs The State Of Jharkhand… — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 368 of 2014

¶2

Raunak Sahu @ Ronak Sahu ........ Petitioner Versus

¶3

The State of Jharkhand and Anr. ...... Opp. Parties

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.P.BHATT

¶5

For the Petitioner : M/s A.K. Mehta and Rahul Kumar, Advocates. For the State : A.P.P.

¶6

¶7

06/02.05.2014 The present anticipatory bail application is 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 Complaint Case No. 1680/2013 for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 324, 504, 379, 506 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code but the learned court below took cognizance for the offence under Sections 323, 504, 379 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶8

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP appearing on behalf of the State and perused the complaint petition and other papers annexed to this application.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and has not committed any offence as alleged and he has been falsely implicated in this case on account of rivalry for a land dispute. It is also submitted that the allegations made in the complaint are vague and prima facie the same do not attract the ingredients of the alleged offence . Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is a student of BBA of Christ University at Banglore and pursuing his studies and he is a law abiding citizen having no criminal antecedent is also ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

¶10

The learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted there is direct and specific allegation against the petitioner having involvement in the alleged offence and, therefore, looking to the gravity of the offence, the petitioner may not be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid rival submissions and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case more particularly that the petitioner is a student of BBA of Christ University at Banglore and

¶12

also considering the nature and gravity of the accusation, this court is of the view that the anticipatory bail is required to be granted in favour of the petitioner. Accordingly, in the event of his arrest or surrender within two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on executing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 1680/2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶13

Anu/-

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

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

Tukani Devi Alias Savita Devi Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sita Ram Sao Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Tohid Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Mehrun Bibi and Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

MD Jubair Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Adventure Travellers Academy through Its Proprietor Sardar Harcharan Singh Vs Tourism