The Hon'ble High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's prayer for anticipatory bail in connection with an FIR alleging assault. The court declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case.
The prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is 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 A.B.A. No.1862 of 2017
Umesh Mandal …… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Ravi Prakash, Advocate For the State : A.P.P ----- 02/Dated: 06/04/2017
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Borio (J) P.S. Case No. 38/2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 83/2017, the case registered under Sections 341, 323, 332, 353, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.
From perusal of impugned order, it appears that the petitioner has assaulted the informant, who is B.D.O., Sahebganj and the aforesaid case was lodged on 09.02.2017 and thereafter the wife of the petitioner has also lodged an FIR against the informant on 16.02.2017.
Considering the fact and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail
Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner is hereby rejected.
( Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Raman/Shahid
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail given the apprehension of arrest.
Umesh Mandal
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
