Allowed

Mukesh Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC24 Jul 2019A.B.A./2140/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners in a case involving alleged cheating, forgery, and cheque dishonour. The court allowed bail upon surrender within four weeks, requiring a bail bond and specific undertakings to cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail; permission to be released on bail on surrender within four weeks upon furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 each with two sureties and complying with listed conditions.

Mukesh Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheque Dishonour | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B. A. No. 2140 of 2019

¶3

Mukesh Singh

¶4

Kashinath Singh … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. … Opposite Parties

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Lukesh Kumar, Adv. For the State : Addl. P.P. For the opposite party no. 2 : Mr. Yogesh Modi, Adv.

¶7

05 / 24.07.19 Heard the parties.

¶8

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No. 102 of 2018 (G.R. No. 2286 of 2018 ) registered under Sections 420/120 of the Indian Penal Code, section 138 of N.I. Act.

¶9

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegations against the petitioners are that they have taken coal from the informant and they are not paying the consideration amount for the same. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners have not taken any coal from the informant. So far as annexure 1 series which are tax invoices field by the informant along with his counter affidavit is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioners drawing attention of the court to paragraph 43 of the case dairy, submits that I.O. of the case upon going to the district transport office, found many surprising information and he found that even the registration numbers which has been shown to be the registration of truck by the informant, were found to be the registration numbers of car and motorcycle. Further drawing attention of the court to page 46 of the case diary,learned counsel for the petitioners submits that I.O. has mentioned in the said paragraph that in the

¶10

tax invoices produced by the informant before the I.O., serious irregularities were found from which, it is apparent that the informant has resorted to large scale of forgery and by forgery, he has deposited false GST invoice and prepared the forged documents to make a case. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that so far as criminal antecedent of petitioner no. 1 about the complaint case is concerned, the petitioner had no knowledge about the same and the petitioner no. 1 has never been served with the summons of that case and the dispute between the parties is at best civil dispute. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case hence, the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶11

The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶12

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, the petitioners shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st class, Dhanbad in connection with Barwadda P.S. Case No. 102 of 2018 (G.R. No. 2286 of 2018 ) subject to the condition that the petitioners will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶14

Smita/-

Mukesh Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rohit Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sintu Kumar Alias S Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Saurabh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanhaiya Ozha Alias Kanhaiya Ojha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Janki Bhuiyan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Imam Ansari Alias MD Inam Alias Mantu Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand