Partly allowed

Pankaj Kumar Jha v. The State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 May 2018A.B.A./275/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand directed the petitioner to surrender by 18.06.2018. Upon surrender and furnishing a bail bond with sureties and depositing 50% of outstanding dues, the petitioner was granted bail in a false implication money suit case. Conditions included cooperation in investigation and notice prior to recording statement.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender; bail granted on furnishing bond, sureties, depositing 50% dues, and complying with conditions including cooperation in investigation.

Pankaj Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Jharkhand — Quashing and FIR | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 275 of 2018

¶2

Pankaj Kumar Jha …… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party

¶3

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P ----- 07/Dated: 09/05/2018

¶5

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 15/2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 423/2017, the case registered under Sections 420/409 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the present case is counter blast of Original (Money)Suit No.21/2017 filed by the petitioner for recovery of his dues, as he has completed the allotted work within the stipulated period, which were supervised and monitored by the officers of the concerned department and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. It is lastly submitted that Rs. 4,64,000/- is outstanding against the petitioner till date and petitioner is ready to deposit atleast 50% of the said amount. Hence, petitioner deserves bail.

¶8

Learned A.P.P opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and also considering the fact and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below on or before 18.06.2018 and in the event of his arrest or surrender, the Court below shall enlarge the above named petitioner, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of J.M.Ist Class, Chaibasa, in connection with Tonto P.S. Case No. 15/2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 423/2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. , subject to the condition that one of the bailers must be local resident of Chaibasa and subject to the further conditions as follows :

¶10

1. Petitioner is directed to deposit Rs.2,32,000/-(50% of the total dues against the petitioner) in the court below on or before 11.06.2018 and thereafter their bail bonds will be accepted by the

¶11

court below which shall be subject to the final result of the case.

¶12

2. Petitioner shall also give an undertaking by filing an affidavit through his pairavikar that they will co-operate in the investigation. 3. Petitioner is directed to deposit his Cell Number and the Xerox copy of Aadhar Card in the court below, and if I.O. wants to record the statement of the petitioner, he will file application in the court below through APP for release of the Cell Number and Xerox copy of Aadhar Card of the petitioner and after getting the same, he will give 72 hours' notice to the petitioner fixing date, time and place and, thereafter, petitioner will appear before him and get his statement be recorded.

¶13

4. If petitioner fail to do so, it will be open for the I.O. to file an application before this court through the Addl.P.P. for cancellation of bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶14

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below through FAX and also handed over to learned APP for transmission of the same to the I.O of this case.

¶15

( Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

¶16

Raman /

Pankaj Kumar Jha v. The State Of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Kumar Jha 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

Bharat Jhunjhunwala Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sudhir Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Abhay Nindkan Tigga Vs State Through Superintendent Of Police Hob Cbi Acb Ranchi

Brahmdeo Prasad Yadav Alias Brahmdeo Pd Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prabhat Thakur Kartik Pandit Vs State of Jharkhand

Shambhu Ho Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Bharat Jhunjhunwala Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Sudhir Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Abhay Nindkan Tigga Vs State Through Superintendent Of Police Hob Cbi Acb Ranchi

Brahmdeo Prasad Yadav Alias Brahmdeo Pd Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prabhat Thakur  Kartik Pandit Vs State of Jharkhand

Shambhu Ho Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Prabhat Thakur Kartik Pandit Vs State of Jharkhand