Allowed

MD Ahzam v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Apr 2019A.B.A./7251/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an anticipatory bail petition under Section 438 CrPC concerning a single money transfer FIR under Section 419/420 IPC read with IT Act, the Court allowed bail pending investigation, noting no criminal antecedents and the possibility of a bank error.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner is directed to be released on anticipatory bail upon surrender or arrest within four weeks, by furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC cond

MD Ahzam 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. 7251 of 2018

¶3

¶4

Md. Ahzam, S/o Mr. Md. Aman, R/o Gaddi Mohallah, P.O. & P.S. Giridih, District Giridih, Jharkhand …… Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

Parvati Pal W/o Madav Chandra Pal, R/o Village- Rana Bandh Tola- Sriram Pur, P.S.Raneshwar, District- Dumka ……Opposite Parties

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Syed Saif Ahmed, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar, A.P.P

¶10

08/Dated: 11/04/2019

¶11

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the

¶12

State.

¶13

Petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Raneshwar P.S. Case No.06 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No.151 of 2018, for the offence under Section 419/420 of the Indian Penal Code, r/w Section 66”C”66”D” of the I.T. Act.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that by default a sum of Rs.19,999/- has been transferred in the account of petitioner which has been subsequently transferred in the account of informant. It is single transaction which has been wrongly made in the account of the petitioner and petitioner has no criminal antecedent, as such petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but has not disputed the fact, that this is single transaction which has been made in the account of petitioner.

¶16

Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, since petitioner has no criminal antecedent and there is single transaction of money, which may occurred because of default of bank, unless and until the culpability against the petitioner is proved, petitioner named above is directed to be released on anticipatory bail in the event of his surrender/arrest withing 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 Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dumka in connection with Raneshwar P.S. Case No.06 of 2018, corresponding to G.R. Case No.151 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶17

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶18

R.S./-

MD Ahzam v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Ahzam 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

Sujit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kuldeep Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Minhaz Qureshi Alias Minhaz Quraishi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Fenku Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bharat Prasad Alias Bharat Khushwaha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Claret Ekka Alias Kalaret Ekka Vs the State of Jharkhand