Allowed

Surajdeo Ram v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Apr 2015A.B.A./364/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This committal order disposed of two connected anticipatory bail applications. The High Court granted bail conditioned upon the deposit of the defalcated amount of Rs. 1,10,000 in the Government Treasury and furnishing of bail bonds with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Direction to release petitioners on bail upon deposit of Rs. 1,10,000 in the Treasury and furnishing of bail bonds with two sureties.

Surajdeo Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 364 of 2015 Surajdeo Ram Versus The State of Jharkhand with A.B. A. No. 484 of 2015 Rajesh Kumar Rajwanshi Versus The State of Jharkhand -------CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioners : M/s A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate & Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------

¶2

5/ 01.04.2015 Both these anticipatory bail applications arise out of the same case and as such, they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.P.P. for the Prosecution.

¶4

The petitioners are apprehending their arrests in connection with Hariharganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 1417 of 2014, for the alleged offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶5

There is allegation against these petitioners to have defalcated the amount of Rs. 1,10,000/-, which was allotted for repairs of the Panchayat building and also for purchasing computer.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. However, for the purpose of anticipatory bail, it is submitted that the petitioners are ready to deposit the amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- in the Government Treasury. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for anticipatory bail.

¶7

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the anticipatory bail.

¶8

In the facts of this case, if the petitioners deposit the amount of Rs. 1,10,000/- in the Government Treasury and produce the proof thereof in the Court below, the petitioners shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000/(ten thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Hariharganj P.S. Case No. 81 of 2014 corresponding to G.R. No. 1417 of 2014, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶9

It is made clear that the deposit made, if any, by the petitioners shall not prejudice the claim of either of the parties.

¶10

( H. C. Mishra, J.)

¶11

R.Kr.

Surajdeo Ram v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surajdeo Ram 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sumit Kumar Paswan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Sanjay Sao Alias Sanjay Kumar Sahu Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rakesh Choubey Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Muneshwar Alias Nuneshwar Prasad Yadav and Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

MD Sabir Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar Rajwanshi Vs The State Of Jharkhand