The petitioner was charged with abduction for ransom under Section 364-A IPC. The High Court observed the petitioner was not named by victims and was not subjected to TIDP. The Court granted bail.
Petitioner directed to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
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. 78 of 2016 Sunil Yadav ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party -------CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA -----For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. --------
03/ 14.03.2016 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
The petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Section 364-A of the Indian Penal Code, in connection with S.T. No. 98 of 2015, arising out of Herhanj P.S. Case No. 24 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 612 of 2012.
The case relates to abduction for ransom 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 the victims have been recovered and they have not named this petitioner. Learned counsel has accordingly, prayed for bail.
Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail, but upon going through the case diary, it is admitted that the petitioner is neither named by the victims nor he has been put on Test Identification Parade.
In the facts of this case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner, Sunil Yadav, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Latehar, in connection with S.T. No. 98 of 2015, arising out of Herhanj P.S. Case No. 24 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 612 of 2012.
( H. C. Mishra, J.)
Amitesh/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, falsely implicated in abduction-for-ransom charges and not named by victims, was entitled to bail.
Whether the High Court could remand accused Sunil Yadav to police custody pending bail bond submission.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sunil Yadav
The State of Jharkhand
H. C. Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
