Allowed

MD Suleman v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Nov 2019A.B.A./3966/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a cheque-fraud/collection-case alleging cheating under non-BNS IPC sections. The court imposed conditions requiring surrender, furnishing sureties, and payment of Rs. 30,000 as interim compensation to the specific opposite party.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender, bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, and ad interim victim compensation of Rs. 30,000 without prejudice to defense.

MD Suleman Vs the State of Jharkhand — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3966 of 2019

¶2

------

¶3

Md. Suleman .... .... …. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand .... .... 2. Md. Imtiyaj Ansari .... Opposite Parties

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shashi Kant Thakur, Advocate For the State : Mr. Arun Kr. Pandey, Addl.P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Mrs. J. Mazumdar, Advocate

¶7

Order No.05 Dated- 07.11.2019

¶8

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Complaint Case No.65 of 2017 instituted under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶9

Heard the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and his son namely Sahijan Alam have collected Rs.15,60,000/- from various persons for providing job to them but neither they are returning the money nor have they provided job to them. It is submitted that allegations against the petitioner are false as he has not taken any money whatsoever from the complainant or any other person. It is then submitted that the informant has not even a chit of paper to show entrustment of any money to the petitioner. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay ad interim victim compensation of Rs.30,000/- without prejudice to his defence in this case to the opposite party No.2 namely- Md. Imtiyaj Ansari subject to final decision of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned A.P.P appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶12

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court of learned C.J.M., Sahibganj within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, the petitioner will be enlarged on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs.30,000/- as ad interim victim compensation without

¶13

prejudice to his defence in this case drawn in favour of the opposite party No.2 namely- Md. Imtiyaj Ansari and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Sahibganj in connection with Complaint Case No.65 of 2017 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶14

In case the petitioner deposits the said demand draft, the court below is directed to issue notice to the opposite party No.2 namely- Md. Imtiyaj Ansari and on his proper identification, the court below shall handover the same to him forthwith.

¶15

In case the petitioner pays Rs.30,000/- to the opposite party No.2 namelyMd. Imtiyaj Ansari, learned court below will pass an appropriate order regarding disbursal of the same at the time of conclusion of trial.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Animesh/

MD Suleman v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Suleman 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

Binod Kumar Sah Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ashok Kumar Sethi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Timir Kant Bardhan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Debsis Goswami Alias Debasish Goswami Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anthony Nikhil Sanga Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anshu Kumar Singh Alias Ansu Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand