Single judge rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 447 IPC, holding that the nature of allegations precluded bail.
Anticipatory bail application rejected; petitioner held in custody.
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. 4296 of 2018
Babu Lal Mahto …… Petitioner
Versus The State of Jharkhand …… Opposite Party -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH
----- For the Petitioner : Mr. S.Mahto, Advocate For the State : A.P.P ----- 05/Dated: 22/10/2018
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Sadar ( Mesra O.P.) P.S. Case No. 511/2017, corresponding to G.R. No. 5269/2017, the case registered under Sections 147, 148, 447, 427, 323, 341, 379, 387 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In view of nature of allegation as alleged against the petitioner, 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 is entitled to anticipatory bail in a case involving offences under Sections 147, 148, 447, 427, 323, 341, 379, 387 IPC.
Whether the nature of allegations warrants enlargement on bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Babu Lal Mahto
The State of Jharkhand
ANANT BIJAY SINGH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
