Allowed

Vinay Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Mar 2019B.A./54/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under B.A. No. 54 of 2019, the High Court of Jharkhand discharged the petitioner, Vinay Kumar Das, directed his release upon deposit of Rs. 3,00,000/- and furnishing a bail bond with sureties within 15 days.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted bail upon deposit of Rs. 3,00,000/- with Indusind Bank and furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each to the CJM, Lohardaga, within 15 days.

Vinay Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand — Corruption | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 54 of 2019

¶3

Vinay Kumar Das … Petitioner Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P.

¶8

------

¶9

Order No.05 Dated- 15.03.2019

¶10

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Lohardaga P.S. case no. 146 of 2015 (G.R. No. 486 of 2015) instituted under sections 406/420/467/468 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Addl. P.P. for the State.

¶12

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner and the coaccused Mayank Kumar have jointly defalcated a sum of Rs.13,82,172/-. It is further submitted that the petitioner along with the co-accused have already deposited a sum of Rs.2,58,012/- and the petitioner has been in custody since 06.10.2018. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the allegation against the petitioner are false. The petitioner is ready and willing to deposit Rs.3,00,000/- with the Informant – Indusind Bank and is also ready and willing to cooperate with the trial. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶13

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶14

Considering submissions of learned counsels and the facts as stated above, I am inclined to release the above named petitioner on bail. Hence, the court below is directed to release the above named petitioner on bail on the petitioner showing the proof of deposit of Rs.3,00,000/- with the Informant-Indusind Bank and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five

¶15

Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lohardaga, in connection with Lohardaga P.S. case no. 146 of 2015 (G.R. No. 486 of 2015) with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Sonu/Gunjan-

Vinay Kumar Das v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinay Kumar Das 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

Mukesh Kumar Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abhimanyu Bauri Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ansarul Haque Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ram Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dilip Kumar Rabidas Alias Dilip Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Khurshid Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand