Allowed

Ambika Prasad Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Feb 2019A.B.A./59/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail fearing arrest in a case alleging offenses under IPC. Court allowed bail contingent on depositing victim compensation and furnishing a bond with sureties, directing release upon compliance.

What did the court decide?

Granted anticipatory bail contingent on depositing Rs. 10,000 victim compensation and furnishing Rs. 25,000 bail bond with two sureties.

Ambika Prasad Gupta 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. 59 of 2019

¶3

Ambika Prasad @ Ambika Prasad Saw … ... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Pudina Devi … … Opposite Parties --------

¶4

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. C.S. Pandey, Advocate For the State : Addl. P.P.

¶7

¶8

Order No. 04: Dated : 7^th February, 2019

¶9

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No. 2195 of 2017 for the offence registered under Sections 341, 323, 376, 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner, by drawing the attention of the Court at page 19 Annexure-2, submits that the petitioner has instituted a case against the husband of the complainant and his Associates for attempting to murder the son of the petitioner vide Hariharganj P.S. Case no. 57 of 2017 and as a counter blast to the said case this false complaint case has been instituted against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are false and the petitioner is ready and willing to pay ad-interim victim compensation of Rs. 10,000/- to the complainant. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail

¶12

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶13

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case where the petitioner, named above, be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of four weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing demand draft of Rs. 10,000/- drawn in favour of the complainant – Pudina Devi as ad interim

¶14

victim compensation and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned A.C.J.M., Palamau in connection with Complaint Case No. 2195 of 2017 subject to the condition laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C

¶15

In case the petitioner deposits the aforesaid amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the complainant - Pudina Devi and on her proper identification, the court below shall release the aforesaid amount in her favour.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

¶17

Ambika Prasad Gupta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ambika Prasad Gupta 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

Burnanga Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Baidul Sk Vs the State of Jharkhand

Satari Banra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Magru Shaw Alias Magru Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Thakuri Turi Alias Thakur Turi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kalam Qureshi Vs the State of Jharkhand