Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No. 98 of 2016 under sections 406, 420, and 120B IPC, alleging false implication. The High Court rejected the prayer due to the petitioner being implicated as the kingpin of the occurrence.
Prayer for anticipatory bail 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. 1928 of 2018 Omkar Nath Pandey @ Omkar Prasad Pandey …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
--------- For the Petitioner :Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate For the State :A.P.P
04/Dated: 13/08/2018
Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jaridih P.S. Case No. 98 of 2016, corresponding to G.R. No. 917 of 2016 for the offence under sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Further, it has been submitted that petitioner is working as head constable, JAP 10, Ranchi. The petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the ground that he was seen with the co-accused persons at Ranchi by the informant.
Learned A.P.P opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Case diary has been received. From perusal of para 8 of the case diary, it appears that petitioner is kingpin of the occurrence, who was working as ‘Hawaldar’.
So considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, his prayer for anticipatory bail is hereby rejected.
(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Satyarthi/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner?
Whether the petitioner being a police constable working as JAP 10 justifies granting anticipatory bail?
Whether the petitioner being kingpin of the occurrence precludes granting anticipatory bail?
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Omkar Nath Pandey @ Omkar Prasad Pandey
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
