Allowed

Arun Saw And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Jul 2017A.B.A./4034/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to petitioners in a criminal case involving assault and theft. Conditions included depositing Rs. 10,000 each as ad interim victim compensation and furnishing bail bonds with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on deposit of Rs. 10,000 each as ad interim victim compensation and furnishing bail bond with two sureties under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

Arun Saw And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Corruption | Jharkhand HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B. A. No. 4034 of 2017

¶3

Arun Saw

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioners : Mr. N. P. Thakur, Adv. For the Opp. Party : Addl. P.P.

¶7

02 / 13.07.17 Apprehending their arrest, the two petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 111 of 2016 (G. R. No. 1172 of 2016 ) registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341,323,307,448, and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶8

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioners as well as learned Addl. PP for the State.

¶9

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that they assaulted the informant causing him injury and with the co-accused they committed theft of Rs. 2,000/-. It was further submitted that all allegations leveled against the petitioners are false. There was a settlement in which it was agreed to by the informant and the other villagers that no obstruction will be made in the construction of temple by the father of the petitioners. The co-accused persons have already been granted bail vide order dated 2898 of 2017 passed in ABA 2898 of 2017. They are ready and willing to deposit ad interim victim compensation for the victim. Hence, these petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

The learned Addl. PP opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to both the petitioners. Hence, in the event their arrest by the police or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 10,000/- each as ad interim victim compensation for the victim Baleshwar Mahto and

¶12

furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned JM, 1^st class, Giridih in connection with Dhanwar P.S. Case No. 111 of 2016 (G. R. No. 1172 of 2016 ) subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

In case of depositing ad interim victim compensation by the petitioners learned JM, 1^st class, Giridih is directed to issue notice to the victim Baleshwar Mahto and release the amount in his favour in equal proportion on proper identification forthwith.

¶14

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶15

Smita/-

Arun Saw And Anr. v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Saw And Anr. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajkumar Roy Alias Raj Kumar Rai Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Y N Yadav Alias Yog Nandan Yadav And Ors. Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Satyendra Singh Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Maghan Rana Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Chaitu Oraon Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Pramod Kumar Gupta Vs The State Of Jharkhand