Disposed

Shankar Mahato Alias Shankar Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Nov 2020A.B.A./2548/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application by petitioner no. 1. An application was filed for anticipatory bail for petitioner no. 2, who alleged assault. The court directed surrender within four weeks and enlarged him on bail under Section 438 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Permission to withdraw IA by petitioner no. 1 accorded. Petitioner no. 2 directed to surrender within four weeks and enlarged on bail subject to conditions.

Shankar Mahato Alias Shankar Mahto Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 2548 of 2020

¶3

Shankar Mahato @ Shankar Mahto

¶4

Deglal Mahato @ Deglal Mahto … ... Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … … Opp. Party

¶5

¶6

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY

¶7

-------For the Petitioners : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate For the State : Mrs. S. Bhagat, A.P.P. --------

¶8

Order No. 03: Dated: 6^th November, 2020

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the State.

¶10

So far as the defect no. 4 is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the same once the situation normalizes.

¶11

An interlocutory application has been preferred by the petitioners being I.A. No. 5746 of 2020 for withdrawal of the anticipatory bail application so far as the petitioner no. 1 is concerned.

¶12

Permission is accorded.

¶13

This application stands dismissed as withdrawn as against the petitioner no. 1.

¶14

I.A. No. 5746 of 2020 stands disposed of.

¶15

The petitioner no. 2 apprehends his arrest in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 9 of 2020.

¶16

It has been alleged that the informant, his wife and son were assaulted by the accused persons. The petitioner is said to have been armed with rod. The wife of the informant had suffered a grievous injury but the same can be attributed to Agnu Mahto in terms of the averments made in the FIR . So far as the assault committed by the petitioner no. 2 is concerned, the same is general and omnibus in nature and in fact the informant and his son had sustained a simple injury on account of such assault

¶17

On consideration of the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no. 2. Accordingly, the petitioner no. 2, above named, is directed to surrender in the court below

¶18

within a period of four weeks from today 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 Judicial Magistrate 1^st class, Dhanbad, in connection with Govindpur P.S. Case No. 9 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶19

This application stands disposed of.

¶20

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.)

¶21

Shankar Mahato Alias Shankar Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shankar Mahato Alias Shankar Mahto 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

Ayodhya Kumar Dubey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dr Dhirendra Kumar Gupta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jitendra Yadav Alias Jitendra Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Saw Alias Manoj Kumar Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Samir Mian Alias Ahmad Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rakesh Kumar Mahato Alias Rakesh Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand