Single judge rejected an anticipatory bail application fearing arrest under Sections 366A and 376 IPC. The court found the petitioner with no interest in the case, ruling him ineligible for bail.
Anticipatory bail application rejected; petitioner not enlarged on bail.
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. 2817 of 2018
Bilal Ahmad @ Md. Bilal @ Samir
…… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand & 02 Ors.
…… Opposite Party
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : A.P.P
05/Dated: 28/09/2018
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Katkamsandi P.S. Case No. 234/2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 3297/2017, the case registered under Sections 366A,376 of the Indian Penal Code.
Pursuant to order dated 20.08.2018, opposite parties are present but petitioner is not present.
It appears that petitioner has no interest in this case.
In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on
bail.
Accordingly, anticipatory bail application of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
Let a copy of this order be communicated to the trial court.
( Anant Bijay Singh, J.)
Raman/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner showing apprehension of arrest warrants granting anticipatory bail in a case under Sections 366A and 376 IPC.
Whether the petitioner has an interest in the proceedings to warrant bail release.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bilal Ahmad
The State of Jharkhand
Anant Bijay Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
