Allowed

Ajay Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jul 2018B.A./2874/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On a bail application in a cheating/extortion case where the accused was not specifically named and was in custody since August 2017, the Single Bench granted bail upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Directed release on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

Ajay Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2874 of 2018

----

Ajay Bhagat

… Petitioner

-versus-

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ----

¶7

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN

¶8

----

¶9

For the Petitioner : Ms. Vandana Singh, Advocate For the State : A.P.P. ----

¶10

3/ 05.07.2018 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶11

Petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing the offence punishable under Sections 384/387/506/120B, 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, in connection with Ormanjhi Police Station Case No.63 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.2704 of 2017, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶12

It is alleged that members of PLFI, which is a banned organization, under the leadership of Sunil Singh came to the crusher of the informant abused and assaulted the staff members and extended threats that if their demands are not fulfilled, they will set the machineries on fire. Further, there is an allegation that the informant was receiving regular calls from a mobile phone through which extortion money was being demanded.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is no specific allegation against the petitioner. Petitioner is not named and his name transpired from the confessional statement of co-accused to the effect that he was also present when Sunil Singh and others went to the crusher. He lastly submits that the petitioner is in custody since 17.08.2017 and charge has been framed in this case on 27.02.2018 as it would appear from the report of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶14

Learned A.P.P. appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail of the petitioner, but cannot controvert the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶15

Taking into consideration the aforesaid submission and the status report showing that no witnesses have been examined till date, petitioner, abovenamed, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the

¶16

-: 2 :-

¶17

like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Ormanjhi Police Station Case No.63 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No.2704 of 2017, with a condition that the petitioner will appear before the Trial Court on each and every date and in the event the petitioner fails to appear before the Trial Court on any single date, bail bonds furnished by the petitioner shall stand cancelled and the Trial Court will take all steps for causing arrest of the petitioner again.

¶18

( Ananda Sen, J.)

¶19

Kumar/Cp-03

Ajay Bhagat v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Bhagat 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Moti Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anjarul Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanaullah Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand

Taiyab Ansari Vs The State Of Jharkhand

Ramesh Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Niraj Prasad Alias Chhotu Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand