In a bail application under B.A. No. 9189 of 2019, the High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's prayer for bail, holding that the gravity of dacoity allegations did not warrant release pending trial.
Prayer for bail rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 9189 of 2019
------
Athar Eqbal @ Md Athar Eqbal
.... .... …. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand
.... .... Opposite Party
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Satish Kumar Keshri, A.P.P.
02/21.10.2019 Heard the parties.
Petitioner is accused in connection with Chandil (Rail) P.S. Case No. 02 of 2019.
It has been alleged that a dacoity was committed in the office premises and various articles were taken away. It appears that on the confession made by the petitioner the stolen wires were recovered from the godown of Umesh Singh and they were subsequently identified by the informant in the Test Identification Parade.
Regard being had to the nature of allegation levelled against the petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Hence, his prayer for bail is accordingly rejected at this stage.
(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J . )
VK
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in a dacoity chargesheet.
Athar Eqbal @ Md Athar Eqbal
The State of Jharkhand
Rongon Mukhopadhyay
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
