Allowed

Gumani Rabidas v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Sept 2020A.B.A./2416/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed an application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, alleged to be involved in financial discrepancies under the Backward Region Grant Fund scheme, was directed to surrender and seek regular bail before the Chief Judicial Magistrate within four weeks, subject to bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks and obtain regular bail from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh, on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 and two sureties.

Gumani Rabidas Vs the State of Jharkhand — Corruption | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 2416 of 2020

¶3

¶4

Gumani Rabidas. ….. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand …. Opposite Party

¶7

Coram: THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶8

-------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Manoj Prasad, Advocate For the State : Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, A.P.P. --------

¶9

02/1-9-2020

¶10

Heard the parties.

¶11

Defect No. 9 (vi) and (vii), as pointed out by the office, are

¶12

ignored.

¶13

The petitioner apprehends his arrest in connection with Basal P.S. Case No. 17 of 2013, G.R. No. 3434 of 2013.

¶14

It has been alleged that for the implementation of various schemes under Backward Region Grant Fund, advance was taken by Sunil Kumar, the then Assistant Engineer posted in the Rural Development Special Division, Hazaribagh. On physical verification of the work assigned to Sunil Kumar, it is alleged that there was a difference of Rs.24,65,650/between the advance taken by said Sunil Kumar and the work done. The F.I.R. was instituted for recovery of Rs.64,120/- with regard to ten BRGF Projects of Patratu Block under Basal P.S.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the main accused Sunil Kumar has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court in A.B.A. No. 1386 of 2016 on deposit of the amount of Rs.64,120/-. He has further stated that the petitioner was the Executive Engineer at the relevant point of time and infact he has not been named in the F.I.R. It has further been stated that the F.I.R. was instituted after a considerable delay from the date the project was said to have been completed.

¶16

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶17

It appears from the F.I.R that the allegations are centered around Sunil Kumar, who as stated above, has already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court albeit on the condition of deposit of Rs.64,120/-. which was the shortfall detected.

¶18

-2-

¶19

On consideration of the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶20

The petitioner, named above, is accordingly directed to surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and pray for regular bail, and in that event, he will be enlarged on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- ( Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh in connection with Basal P.S. Case No. 17 of 2013, G.R. No. 3434 of 2013, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

This application stands allowed.

¶22

Rakesh/-

Gumani Rabidas v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gumani Rabidas 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

Ajay Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Tuntun Prasad Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Riyaz Mian Alias MD Reyaz Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kriahna Mohan Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dineshwar Yadav Alias Dineshwar Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand