Allowed

Amit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC13 Nov 2019A.B.A./4891/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in a cheating case alleging hire-purchase default. Bail to be granted upon arrest if they deposit Rs.5 lakh and provide acceptable sureties, under conditions to cooperate with investigation and appear when noticed.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail upon deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- with informant and furnishing bail bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Amit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 4891 of 2019

¶3

Amit Kumar

¶4

Arun Kumar … Petitioners Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

… 2. Vicky Kumar Opposite Party

¶7

------

¶8

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Bibhash Sinha, Advocate For the State : Ranjit Kumar, Addl. P.P. For the O.P. No.2 : Sajid Yunus, Advocate

¶10

------

¶11

Order No.05 Dated- 13.11.2019

¶12

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Argora P.S. Case No. 32 of 2019 registered under sections 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Heard the parties.

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners on hirepurchase agreement took the trucks of the informant but they have not paid the rental amount. The learned counsel for the petitioner drawing attention of this Court to the supplementary affidavit dated 29.07.2019 submits that all the payments have been made by the petitioners. It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that all the 21 vehicles taken together have conducted 55 trips. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations against the petitioners are false. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to jointly pay Rs.5,00,000/- to the informant without prejudice to their defence in this case subject to final decision of the case and also undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of four Months from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs.5,00,000/- in favour of informant and 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 S.D.J.M., Ranchi, in connection with Argora P.S. Case No. 32 of 2019 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile numbers and a copy of their Aadhar Cards in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile numbers during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶16

In case, the petitioners deposits the aforesaid demand draft, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant and hand over the said demand draft to him, after proper identification.

¶17

At the time of conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court will pass appropriate orders regarding the amount, if any, deposited by the petitioners with the informant.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

Sonu-

Amit Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar 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

MD Fajale Karim Alias Jumrati Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kailash Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritesh Choudhary Alias Anil Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Navin Anand Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanoj Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Asul Hage Alias Allauddin Vs the State of Jharkhand