Allowed

Pankaj Yadav Alias Pankaj Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Oct 2020A.B.A./4523/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, facing criminal charges for alleged theft of diesel, sought anticipatory bail. The Court granted bail, noting that co-accused had already obtained protection and the allegations were based on confessional statements. Bail was granted subject to furnishing a bond and appearing in four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to furnishing a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties and appearing within four weeks.

Pankaj Yadav Alias Pankaj Kumar Yadav Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 4523 of 2020

¶3

---Pankaj Yadav @ Pankaj Kumar Yadav ----Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand ----Opposite Party ---

¶4

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aparesh Kumar Singh Through: Video Conferencing --For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Anuradha Sahay, A.P.P.

¶5

02/ 03.10.2020 Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to file supplementary affidavit in order to remove defect no. 9(i). So far as defect no. 9(iv) is concerned, he submits that duly certified typed copies of pages shall also be filed along with supplementary affidavit. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioner is allowed two weeks’ time to remove the surviving defects. Defect no. 9(iii) shall also be removed by learned counsel for the petitioner during the period of 2 weeks.

¶6

Petitioner who has been made accused in Katras (Ramkanali O.P.) P.S. Case No. 45 of 2019 for the offence under Sections 379, 411 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code, pending before learned S.D.J.M., Dhanbad, has approached this Court for protection in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been made accused only on the basis of confessional statement of accused, Naresh Yadav and Ranjan Yadav when they were apprehended in connection with theft of 30 to 50 litres of diesel from the vehicle of the informant. Altogether 18 persons were named by these two accused persons, who have been unnecessarily implicated in the F.I.R without any incriminating material having been found against them. Allegation of theft of 30 to 50 litres of diesel against 18 other co-accused persons like the petitioner is frivolous and concocted. Considering these circumstances, the other co-accused, namely, Mantu Mandal in A.B.A. No. 2352 of 2019 vide order dated 23.04.2019, Rajesh Kumar Gopa @ Rajesh Gope in A.B.A. No. 4703 of 2019 vide order dated 19.07.2019 and Dhrup Mandal in A.B.A. No. 4872 of 2019 vide order dated 29.07.2019 and Shyamdev Yadav @ Shyamdeo Ydav have been granted anticipatory bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court (Annexure-2 Series). Petitioner is innocent and has no criminal antecedent. Therefore, he may be granted protection in terms of Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

¶8

Learned A.P.P. for the State has opposed the prayer. However, it is not disputed that four other similarly situated co-accused persons named by the two accused, Naresh Yadav and Ranjan Yadav have been granted anticipatory bail by the

¶9

coordinate Bench of this Court and that the allegation relates to theft of 30 to 50 litres of diesel only from the vehicle of the informant.

¶10

Having regard to the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner above named, in the event of his surrender or arrest within a period of 4 weeks, shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Dhanbad in connection with Katras (Ramkanali O.P.) P. S. Case No. 45 of 2019, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) of Cr.P.C.

¶11

( Aparesh Kumar Singh, J)

¶12

jk/

Pankaj Yadav Alias Pankaj Kumar Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Yadav Alias Pankaj Kumar Yadav 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

Surdhania Devi Vs State of Jharkhand

Minakshi Hembrom Vs Rahul Kumar Ranjan

M S Ajmani Infrastructure and Projects P Ltd. through Its Director Kunal Ajmani Vs Smt Vandana Dadel Now Smt Pooja Singhal Secretary Art Culture and Sports Development

Manish Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sakaldeo Prasad Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravindra Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand