In a bail petition challenging complicity in IPC offences, the court dismissed the claim of false implication and granted regular bail on furnishing bond and sureties.
Petitioner released on bail by furnishing bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of the like amount each to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau.
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 B.A. No. 4341 of 2019
Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Ram … … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR ----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, P.P. -----
03/08.08.2019 Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 269/270/274/307/308/419/420/467/468/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. The petitioner has wrongly been shown as the compounder working in Maa Vindhyawasini Clinic, Manjoor Market, Haidaragar. In fact, the petitioner was employed there as night guard. It is further submitted that though counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State of Jharkhand, yet there is no mention of any inspection report prepared on 14.05.2015. The petitioner has been roped in the present case without verifying the true facts by the police. Though the F.I.R. was lodged in the year 2015, yet none of the co-accused persons was apprehended by the police in connection with the present case. Warrant of arrest was issued against the petitioner on 24.01.2019 and thereafter, he voluntarily surrendered before the court. There is no cogent material to connect the petitioner with the present case. As such, the petitioner who is in judicial custody since 27.03.2019 may be given the privilege of regular bail.
The learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner's prayer for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner above named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamau, in connection with Haidarnagar P.S. Case No. 22 of 2015, corresponding to G.R. No. 1015 of 2015.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
Manish
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, accused of offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, is entitled to regular bail.
Ajay Kumar @ Ajay Ram
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Shankar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
