In a bail application under Section 395 IPC for dacoity, the petitioner claimed false implication and denial of recovered loot. The Court rejected the bail prayer upon finding the looted SIM was traced to the petitioner's mobile phone.
Prayer for release on bail stands rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.8765 of 2014
Rashid Ansari
..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
…. Opposite Party
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C. MISHRA
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kr. Sinha For the State : A. P.P.
7/20.07.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
Petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 395 of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with Chandwa P.S. Case No.23 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.128 of 2014, S.T. No.232 of 2014.
The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and there is no recovery of the looted mobile from the petitioner, though it is so mentioned in the impugned order.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer and has pointed out from the case diary that it was found that the looted SIM was used in the mobile phone of the petitioner.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail stands rejected.
(H. C. Mishra, J)
R.Kumar
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be released on bail given the allegation of false implication and lack of recovered loot centred on the petitioner.
Whether the evidence that the looted SIM was used in the petitioner's mobile phone precludes bail in a dacoity case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Rashid Ansari
The State of Jharkhand
H.C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
