Sk Nasim Vs The State Of Jharkhand

There is direct allegation against the petitioner to have taken the son of the complainant to Bangalore on 15.8.2012 and thereafter the son of the complainant is traceless.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and the report about the missing of the boy was given at Bangalore also, where the police made all efforts for searching the boy, but the boy could not traced. Learned counsel accordingly, prayed for bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the State as also learned counsel for the Complainant have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the boy is still traceless.

¶14

In view of the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner to have taken away the boy, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected.

¶15

(H. C. Mishra, J)

¶16

R.Kumar

Sk Nasim v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sk Nasim 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

Raju Sharma Alias Raju Kumar Sharma Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Deepak Mandal Alias Dipak Mandal Alias Deepwa Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Bikash Yadav Alias Vikash Yadav Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Mukund Kumar Deo Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Manir Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ajay Prasad Vs The State Of Jharkhand