Besides noting the petitioner's apprehension of arrest in a case involving Sections 376A IPC and Section 9 POSCO Act, the single-judge bench dismissed the anticipatory bail application on the ground that a prior application was rejected without any fresh material or grounds advanced.
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.177 of 2018
Ranjan Kumar Arya …… Petitioner Versus
The State of Jharkhand ........Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH For the Petitioner :Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the State :A.P.P.
06/Dated: 09/03/2018
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad (Saraidhela) P.S. Case No. 22 of 2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 415 of 2017 (Spl) (P) Case No. 9 of 2017 for the offence under section 376 A of the India Penal Code and under section 9 of POSCO Act.
It appears that earlier the anticipatory bail application of the petitioner bearing A.B.A. NO, 2513 of 2017 has been rejected vide order dated 15.09.2017 and no fresh ground has been taken by the petitioner in the instant anticipatory bail application. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is dismissed.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Satyarthi/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to anticipatory bail given the rejection of an earlier application without fresh grounds.
Ranjan Kumar Arya
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
