The High Court of Jharkhand refused to release the petitioner on bail, noting his criminal antecedents and the merit rejection of his earlier bail plea, disregarding the technical bail granted to co-accused.
Bail application rejected; copy to be communicated to the learned court below via FAX.
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. 9945 of 2019
Gaya Nath Mandal .... ...... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ..... Opposite Party
CORAM :HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ANUBHA RAWAT CHOUDHARY
--For the Petitioner : Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Suraj Mohan, A.P.P. ---
03/ 10.01.2020 Heard Mr. Raja Ravi Shekhar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Heard Mr. Suraj Mohan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party- State of Jharkhand.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is in custody since 15.12.2018 in connection with S.T. No. 74/2019 arising out of Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 263 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. No. 962 of 2018, registered under Section 414 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25(1-A)/26/35 of the Arms Act, now pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge-I, Rajmahal.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that earlier the petitioner had filed B.A. No. 1336 of 2019 which was dismissed by this Court on 06.07.2019. He submits that he has renewed his prayer for bail and has explained criminal antecedent of the petitioner by stating that in most of the cases, he has already been enlarged on bail.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the persons who were apprehended on the spot, have been enlarged on bail by the learned court below. He further submits that a supplementary affidavit has been filed bringing on record the order granting bail, which is dated 01.02.2019.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite partyState of Jharkhand opposes the prayer for bail and submits that the case of the petitioner was rejected by this Court considering the
2
number of criminal antecedents against the petitioner and also the case was rejected on merits. He further submits that the bail order granting bail to the co-accused which is dated 01.02.2019, has been granted on the technical ground, in as much as, the charge-sheet was not submitted against them and 60 days’ period had elapsed. Thereafter, the bail order was passed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.
7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the bail application of the petitioner was rejected on earlier occasion vide order dated 06.07.2019 on merits as well as on considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. This Court also finds that bail granted to the co-accused by the learned court below under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. has no bearing in this case.
8. Accordingly, this bail application is hereby rejected.
9. Let a copy of this order be communicated to the learned court below through ‘FAX’.
(Anubha Rawat Choudhary, J.)
Pankaj/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves to be released on bail considering his criminal antecedents and rejection of earlier bail application.
The relevance of bail granted to co-accused on technical grounds under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. to the petitioner's bail.
Gaya Nath Mandal
The State of Jharkhand
Anubha Rawat Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
