Allowed

Haresh Kumar Alias Harish Kumar Mahto Alias Tatu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC19 Feb 2019B.A./51/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to the petitioner accused of an offence under Section 394 IPC, directing his release on a bond with sureties and stipulating conditions including physical presence during trial and furnishing an Aadhaar card copy.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties of like amount with conditions including physical attendance and submission of Aadhaar card details.

Haresh Kumar Alias Harish Kumar Mahto Alias Tatu Vs the… — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 51 of 2019

¶3

Haresh Kumar @ Harish Kumar Mahto ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party -----

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT BIJAY SINGH

¶5

----- For the Petitioner : Mr. Baleshwar Yadav, Advocate For the State : A.P.P

¶6

-----

¶7

03 /Dated: 19/02/2019

¶8

The petitioner has been made accused for the offence under Sections 394 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is not named in the FIR. From the impugned order, it appears that the name of the petitioner has transpired from the confessional statement of the co-accused. The learned court below while disposing of the bail application has come to the finding that the petitioner was arrested on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused. It submitted that petitioner is in jail custody since 03.10.2018 and the final form has been submitted.

¶10

Keeping in view the detention of the petitioner in custody as also the fact that petitioner has no other criminal antecedent, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of SDJM, Ramgarh in connection with Rajrappa P.S. Case No. 131/2018, subject to the condition that one of the bailers must be close relative of the petitioner and subject to the further conditions as follows:

¶11

1. Petitioner is 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 will be at liberty to cancel the bail bonds of the petitioner.

¶12

2. Petitioner is further directed that alongwith the bail bonds, he will furnish his Cell number and xerox copy of AADHAR Card in the court below.

¶13

Let a copy of this order be communicated to the court below through FAX.

¶14

(Anant Bijay Singh, J.)

¶15

Raman /-

Haresh Kumar Alias Harish Kumar Mahto Alias Tatu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haresh Kumar Alias Harish Kumar Mahto Alias Tatu 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

Dhaniram Murmu Alias Hagru Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munshi Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kartik Lohar Alias Kartik Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Sadique Vs the State of Jharkhand

Satyaban Mahakud Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tabrej Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand