Allowed

Pankaj Sao v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Jan 2016B.A./10085/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 420, and 120-B IPC, the High Court of Jharkhand released the petitioner, falsely implicated as the son of the main accused in a construction-deposit cheating case, on bail upon furnishing a bond sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 and two sureties of similar amount.

Pankaj Sao Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 10085 of 2015

¶3

¶4

Pankaj Sao .… Petitioner

¶5

-VersusThe State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party

¶6

------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA

¶7

For the Petitioner : : M/s. Rashmi Kumari For the State : : M/s. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P. -------

¶8

2/ 07.01.2016. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State.

¶9

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Domchanch P.S. Case No.219 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.1428 of 2014, for the offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 406, 420, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

There was an agreement between the parties for construction and sale of flat upon a particular piece of land, pursuant to which, the installments were taken by the accused persons, but the flats were not constructed. Thereafter there was another agreement between the parties, in which, it was agreed that money of the depositors would be returned back, or the appropriate share in the land will be transferred to them. It is alleged that even the same was not done.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only being the son of the main accused and in the similar circumstance the brother of this petitioner has been granted bail by order 7.5.2015 in B.A. No. 1180 of 2015 as it was found that only the parents of the petitioner were the signatories of the agreement between the parties. Learned counsel accordingly, prayed for bail.

¶12

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer.

¶13

In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Pankaj Sao, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Arbind Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, or his successor, in connection with, Domchanch P.S. Case No.219 of 2014, corresponding to G.R. No.1428 of 2014.

¶14

(H.C.Mishra, J.)

¶15

D.S.

Pankaj Sao v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Sao 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

Basil Kujur Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Suraj Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Gullam Hussain Ansari Alias Md Hussain Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ravi Das Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Vikash Paswan Alias Vikash Kumar Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Kawal Dhari Vishwakarma And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand