Allowed

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC23 Feb 2018B.A./1231/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail petition involved an accused under multiple sections of the IPC. The court observed that the allegation of the petitioner's involvement was vague, omnibus, and lacked a specific overt act. It also noted the petitioner's name was handwritten in the report.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 1231 of 2018

¶3

Arun Yadav @ Arun Kr. Yadav……....… Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand.………… Opp. Party

¶4

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen

¶5

…… For the Petitioner : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Advocate For the State : A.P.P.

¶6

2/23.02.2018 Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State, who opposes the prayer for bail.

¶7

The petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 427, 387, 436 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶8

It is alleged that several persons have attacked the brother of the informant and assaulted him with ‘Sabal’ and ‘Danda’. It is further alleged that because of the said assault the brother of the informant succumbed to the injury.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the entire allegation is vague and omnibus. He further submits that there is no specific overt act attributed to this petitioner. He further submits that the name of this petitioner has been inserted in the F.I.R by hand, which would be apparent from para-3 of the written report itself. He further submits that since this petitioner is the husband of Mukhiya, he has been implicated in this case just to create a pressure.

¶10

After going through the FIR and the impugned order, I find that there is no specific overt act attributed to this petitioner. Further, the allegation of demand of extortion is against one Abdul Gaffar Mian and Dastgir Mian. I further find that the name of this petitioner has been inserted by hand in the typed written report.

¶11

Keeping in view the aforesaid fact, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, petitioner namely, Arun Yadav @ Arun Kr. Yadav 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 Sri Abhishek Srivastava, Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Garhwa, in connection with Bishunpura P.S. Case No. 32 of 2017 [G.R. No. 855/2017].

¶12

( Ananda Sen, J )

¶13

Mukund/-cp. 3

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Yadav Alias Arun Kumar Yadav 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

Disco Manjhi Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Vicky Kumar Chandravanshi Alias Rohit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raj Tilak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Poddar and Ors. Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Deepak Kumar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dhananjay Prasad Yadav Alias Dhananjay Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand