Allowed

Dhaniram Murmu Alias Hagru v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC18 Feb 2019B.A./302/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed bail to three petitioners accused under sections 12(1)(3)/13 of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act 2005 subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties, physical presence conditions, submission of Aadhar details, deposit of Rs. 2,000 each under Arm Welfare Fund, and furnishing receipt to the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing Rs. 25,000 bond with sureties, deposit of Rs. 2,000 under Arm Welfare Fund, and compliance with attendance and documentation conditions.

Dhaniram Murmu Alias Hagru Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.302 of 2019

¶2

1.Dhaniram Murmu @ Hagru

¶3

Chhota @ Kala Majhi @ Bikram Murmu

¶4

3.Tungru Majhi @ Kanai Soren @Thungru Majhi

¶5

….. Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH --------- For the Petitioners : Mr Prakash Kumar Adv. For the State : , A.P.P ---------

¶8

5/Dated: 18/02/2019

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the State.

¶10

The petitioners are the accused in a case in connection with Kandra P.S Case No. 32 of 2018,corresponding to G.R Case No.;699 of 2018 for the offence under sections 12(1)(3)/13 of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act 2005 pending in the court of S.D.J.M Seraikella

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and has committed no offence. . Petitioner is in jail custody 10.7.2018.

¶12

The learned A.P.P opposed the prayer for bail

¶13

In that view of the matter,,the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five Thousand) each with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M Seraikella in connection with Kandra P.S Case No. 32 of 2018,corresponding to G.R Case No.;699 of 2018 with the condition that (I) petitioners are directed to remain physically present before the trial court on each and every date till conclusion of trial and will cooperate in trial, failing which the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioners (II) petitioners are further directed that along with the bail bonds, they will furnish their Cell Number and Xerox copy of AADHAR Card in the court below (III) One of the bailor must be close relative of the petitioners (IV) Further the petitioners shall deposit Rs. 2,000/- each by way of cost in the account of Arm Welfare Fund Battle Casualties being A/C No.90552010165915,IFSC Code:-SYNBOOO9055, Syndicate Bank, Branch, South Block,Defence Headquarter , New Delhi Branch Code 9055 and will submit a receipt of the same before the court below at the time of furnishing bail bonds.

¶14

Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below and also

¶15

to the learned counsel for the parties.

¶16

(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

¶17

Dhaniram Murmu Alias Hagru v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhaniram Murmu Alias Hagru 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

Anil Kumar Verma Vs State of Jharkhand

Bhupeshwar Singh Alias Muneshwar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhola Yadav Alias Satish Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munshi Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kartik Lohar Alias Kartik Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jaya Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand