Allowed

Claret Ekka Alias Kalaret Ekka v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC11 Apr 2019A.B.A./7301/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to a female petitioner facing prosecution for election-related offences involving a false caste certificate. The court noted the certificate was based on a registration error made by her guardian and released her on bail subject to cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail upon surrender within four weeks, furnishing bonds of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation and appearance.

Claret Ekka Alias Kalaret Ekka Vs the State of Jharkhand — Election Law | Jharkhand HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 7301 of 2018

¶3

Claret Ekka alias Kalaret Ekka, W/o Shibu Mahato, R/o- village-Salhan, P.O. + P.S.Angarha, District- Ranchi. ….... Petitioner.

¶4

Versus The State of Jharkhand. …… Opposite Party.

¶5

-----

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO

¶7

-----

¶8

For the Petitioner : Mr. Indrajit Sinha, Advocate. : Mr. Prashant Pallav, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Vikash Kishore, A.P.P. -----

¶9

06/Dated:11.04.2019 Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the

¶10

State.

¶11

The petitioner has prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.42 of 2018, corresponding to G. R. case No.1534 of 2018, for the offence registered under sections 120(B), 177, 181,192, 193, 198, 200 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it has alleged that petitioner has contested the election of Mukhiya from Salhan Panchayat, on the basis of a false certificate, which has been issued in favour of petitioner for claiming her to be a Scheduled Tribe. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner cast has been mentioned in the School certificate as her mother was admittedly a Scheduled Tribe but after death of her biological father her mother has entered into a matrimonial relation with one person, who was admittedly not a Scheduled Tribe. Petitioner has no role in making such entry in her school register. Subsequently on the basis of school register, petitioner has applied for issuance of caste certificate, before the competent authority, which was recommended by the Mukhiya showing her genealogical table. On that background petitioner has obtained caste certificate and contested the Election and declared successful in the Election. Subsequently after the F.I.R. was lodged and it was found that false certificate has been issued in that favour of petitioner because of wrong entry made in the School register. Pursuant thereto an Election Petition was filed in which it has been declared null and void subsequently F.I.R. has been lodged against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that whatever the certificate it has been issued on the basis of school register in which petitioner has no role rather the guardian of the petitioner made entry and on the basis of the same, the certificate has been issued in favour of petitioner. The

¶13

-2-

¶14

petitioner has not taken any financial advance or advantage because of the such certificate, which has subsequently been also cancelled. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is a lady as such, petitioner may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that on the basis of affidavit filed by the petitioner such false certificate has been issued by the competent authority as such, connivance of the petitioner cannot be ruled out.

¶16

Considering the rival submissions of the parties, as the petitioner has been given caste certificate on the basis of wrong entry made in the register for which petitioner cannot be held liable. Under the aforesaid circumstances, petitioner is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of her 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 Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.42 of 2018, corresponding to G. R. case No.1534 of 2018, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶17

However, the petitioner shall co-operate in the investigation and shall physically appear before the learned trial Court on each and every date till conclusion of trial.

¶18

Jay/

Claret Ekka Alias Kalaret Ekka v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Claret Ekka Alias Kalaret Ekka 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

MD Ahzam Vs the State of Jharkhand