The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner regarding an FIR for arson and other offences, subject to deposit of Rs. 5,000 interim compensation and furnishing a bond.
Petitioner released on bail upon deposit of Rs. 5,000 victim compensation and execution of Rs. 25,000 bail bond.
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. 18 of 2019
Chandeep Ram … ... Petitioner
Versus
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
For the Petitioner : Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P.
Order No. 0: Dated : 1st February, 2019
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 2186 of 2017 for the offence registered under Sections 307, 436, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and cognizance has been taken under sections 436, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
Heard the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner along with accused persons has set fire to the house of the informant. It is further submitted that after investigation Police submitted final report and upon protest petition filed by the informant learned trial court found prima facie case. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are false and petitioner is the brother of the husband of the informant and this false case has been filed because of family dispute between the parties. It is further submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay ad-interim victim compensation of Rs. 5,000/- to the informant. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail
The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where the petitioner, named above, be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the
date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing demand drafts Rs. 5,000/- drawn in favour of the informant- Matrani Devi as ad interim victim compensation and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned SDJM, Palamau at Daltonganj in connection with Complaint Case No. 2186 of 2017 subject to the condition laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. with further condition that the petitioner will not annoy or disturb the informant in any manner during the pendency of this case.
In case the petitioners deposit the aforesaid amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant- Matrani Devi and on her proper identification, the court below shall release the aforesaid amount in favour of the informant.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
MM
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Whether the petitioner is willing to pay interim victim compensation.
Whether conditions are necessary to prevent annoyance to the informant.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Chandeep Ram
The State of Jharkhand
Matrani Devi
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
