Allowed

Manilal Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand through C B I

Jharkhand HC16 Feb 2016A.B.A./3191/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, a revenue employee, apprehending arrest under the Prevention of Corruption Act and IPC charges of common intention and perjury, subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on surrender within two weeks, furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Manilal Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Jharkhand HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 3191 of 2015

¶3

Manilal Mahto .... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India through CBI ... Opposite Party

¶4

Coram : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI NATH VERMA For the petitioner (s): Mr. N.K.Chatterjee For the opposite party : Addl.P.P.

¶5

16.02.2016 Apprehending his arrest in connection with RC No. 04(A)/2010-AHD- R registered under section 120B,193,420 of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)((d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, the petitioner prays for grant of anticipatory bail .

¶6

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

¶7

learned counsel for the State .

¶8

As it appears from the FIR that the case against the co-accused persons, including the then Ministers in the State of Jharkhand, was instituted for corrupt practices and acquiring huge assets. The petitioner was earlier not named as an accused in the case. The matter was subsequently investigated by the CBI and the petitioner, being revenue Karmchari , has been made an accused in this case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has wrongly been implicated in this case and being an employee of the lowest strata, he had to obey the direction given by the higher authorities and similarly situated other co-accused who was also a revenue karmchari, has been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 5.1.2016 passed in ABA No. 3168 of 2015. Hence, he deserves the privilege of grant of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Learned counsel for the CBI opposed the prayer, but fairly submitted that the other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail.

¶11

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner above named, in the event of his arrest or surrender before the court below within a period of two weeks positively from the date of this order, shall 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 learned Special Judge CBI, Ranchi, in connection with RC No. 04(A)/2010-AHD- R, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶12

( R.N.Verma, J. )

¶13

Ambastha/-

Manilal Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand through C B I

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manilal Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand through C B I

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

Jagarnath Gope Alias Jagarnath Manjhi Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ramswaroup Yadav And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Chandrabanshi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Braj Mohan Pfrasad Kiran Alias Braj Mohan Kiran Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shiv Charan Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sunita Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand