Allowed

Dina Nath Singh v. the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance

Jharkhand HC14 Feb 2019A.B.A./5876/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to a petitioner accused of corruption and criminal dishonesty offences. The court extended relief subject to conditions, including cooperation in the investigation and physical presence in court until the framing of charges.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail on surrender/arrest within four weeks, subject to conditions of furnishing bonds, sureties, cooperation in investigation, and attendance in court.

Dina Nath Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance — Corruption | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5876 of 2018

¶2

Dina Nath Singh, aged about 68 years, S/o Late Ram Badai Singh, permanent R/o village – Ramgarh, P.O. - Ramgarh, P.S. - Ramgarh, District -Kaimur, Bihar, Present Address – Ramnagri, Sector 3A, Rajeev Nagar, P.O. - Rajeev Nagar, P.S. - Rajeevnagar, District – Patna (Bihar)

¶3

…...... Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand through Vigilance ….. Opposite Party

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶7

For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate.

¶8

: Mr. Raunak Sahay, Advocate.

¶9

For the A.C.B. : Mr. Tripati Nath Verma, Advocate.

¶10

05/14.02.2019. Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the A.C.B.

¶11

The petitioner, who is an accused for the offence under Sections 406, 409, 419,420, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) r/w Section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1988, has prayed for bail expressing apprehension of his arrest in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No.11 of 2015, corresponding to Vigilance case No. 66 of 2017.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted, that earlier for the same occurrence petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 50 of 2011 corresponding to G. R. No. 310 of 2011 under sections 406, 409, 419,420,120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, which was registered on the basis of joint inquiring report submitted by committee before Deputy Commissioner, who has directed the Block Development Officer to register case.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted, that in the said case petitioner has already been enlarged on bail in A.B.A. No. 3001 of 2012 vide order dated 09.04.2013 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that subsequently present case has been instituted and as such, facts are same and petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the A.C.B. has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 50 of 2011 was not registered under P.C. Act and present case is registered under P.C. Act and as such, instant anticipatory bail application may be rejected.

¶16

This court finds that for the similar allegation Manoharpur P.S. Case No. 50 of 2011 has been registered and in the said case petitioner has been granted anticipatory bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court.

¶17

-2-

¶18

Under the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to be released on bail in event of his surrender/arrest within four weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/(Rupees Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court of Special Judge, A.C.B., Chaibasa in connection with Vigilance P.S. Case No.11 of 2015, corresponding to Vigilance case No. 66 of 2017, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. However, the petitioner shall also co-operate in the investigation and shall physically present before the learned trial Court on each and every date till framing of charge.

¶19

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶20

Jay/-

Dina Nath Singh v. the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dina Nath Singh v. the State of Jharkhand through Vigilance

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

Mumtaj Shah Alias Mumtaj Sai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Narendra Mahto Alias Narendra Kumar Alias Narendra Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Panchu Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vijay Sao Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Khurshid Alias MD Khurshid Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Parnam Pd Kushwaha Alias Pranam Kumar Kushwaha Vs the State of Jharkhand