Allowed

Anil Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Oct 2018B.A./7806/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was filed by accused persons charged with cheating and criminal breach of trust. The Court noted discrepancies in admitted amounts and opposition arguments but, considering the readiness to repay and partial refunds, granted bail requiring a bank draft to clear the mentioned liability within a month.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail f Rs.10,000 each with two sureties, subject to repayment of outstanding amount by bank draft within one month.

Anil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 7806 of 2018

¶2

With

¶3

B.A. No. 7430 of 2018

¶4

Anil Kumar ... Petitioner(B.A. No. 7806/18). Roop Kumar Singh

¶5

@ Rup Kumar Singh ...Petitioner (B.A. No. 7430/18)

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand

¶8

Nelson Purty .. Opp. parties (in both cases)

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANDA SEN . -----For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate. For the State : A.P.P. For Opp. Party No. 2 : Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate.

¶10

05/12.10.2018: Heard the counsel for the parties.

¶11

The petitioners are accused for the offence punishable under Section(s) 420, 406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

It is alleged that the petitioners have illegally received the amount from the informant as well as the victim and misappropriated the entire money.

¶13

Mr. A.K. Sahani, learned counsel for Opp. Party No. 2 submits that the figure of the amount as mentioned in para 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the case diary is the correct figure and not the figure mentioned in the chart produced in court by the petitioners.

¶14

Learned senior counsel for the petitioners, upon instruction from his clients, submits that the petitioners are ready and willing to re-pay the amount to the investors as mentioned in the case diary. He further submits that some of the amount has already been refunded to the informant as well as the victim. On this submission, Mr. A.K. Sahani, counsel appearing on behalf of opp. Party No. 2 submits that the same may be adjusted, for which, his client has no objection.

¶15

In view of the aforesaid submissions, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, in connection with Chutia P.S. Case No. 142/2018, corresponding to G.R. No. 3691 of 2018, subject to condition that the entire amount which has been mentioned in the case diary, after deducting the amount, already paid, must be handed over the investors before the learned court below by way of Bank Draft within a month from their release. If the amount is not paid, the informant as well as the victim is at liberty to file an application before the court concerned for cancellation of bail of the petitioners.

¶16

(ANANDA SEN, J.)

¶17

Anu/-C.P.-3

Anil Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anil Kumar 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

Ranjit Kumar Pramanik Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dharmendra Baraik Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhima Shankar Ojha Alias Golu Alias Bhim Shankar Ojha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Satyendra Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Roop Kumar Singh Alias Rup Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pankaj Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand