Allowed

Ejaj Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Sept 2020Cr.A(SJ)/84/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed an appeal against the rejection of bail. The court, noting delays in the FIR and no witness examination by the trial court, directed the Additional Sessions Judge to enlarge the appellant on bail by furnishing a bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

The appeal is allowed; the appellant is to be enlarged on bail by delivering a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of like amount to the Additional Sessions Judge.

Ejaj Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Caste Atrocities | Jharkhand HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No.84 of 2020

¶2

Ejaj Ansari

¶3

…… Appellant

¶4

Versus

¶5

1. The State of Jharkhand

¶6

2. Sima Oraon ….. Respondents

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMITAV K. GUPTA

¶8

--------- For the Appellant : Mr. Onkar Nath Tiwary, Advocate Mr. Altamash Khan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari, A.P.P. ---------

¶9

04/Dated: 03rd September, 2020

¶10

1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 14.01.2020, passed in Misc. Cr. Application No.209 of 2019 (SC/ ST – 05 of 2019) by the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge – 1^st , Lohardaga, whereby prayer for bail of the appellant has been rejected.

¶11

2. The appellant is an accused in connection with SC/ST Case No.05 of 2019, arising out of Kisko Police Station Case No.24 of 2019, registered under Section 376 of I.P.C and Section 3(2) (Va) of the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

¶12

3. Having heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.P.P and on perusal of the status report, it appears that charge was framed on 19.11.2019 and till date no witnesses have been examined. As per the allegation in the F.I.R, the prosecutrix is aged 24 years and she has stated that for the past two-three years, on threats of killing her and her son, the appellant had established physical relationship with her. On 12.07.2019 he again established physical relationship and when she protested she was assaulted by the appellant.

¶13

Considering the delay in lodging of the F.I.R., I am inclined to enlarge the appellant on bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge – 1^st , Lohardaga, in connection with Misc. Cr. Application No.209 of 2019 (SC/ ST Case No.05 of 2019), arising out of Kisko Police Station Case No.24 of 2019. 4. In the result, the appeal is, hereby, allowed.

¶14

(AMITAV K. GUPTA, J.)

¶15

Chandan/-

Ejaj Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ejaj Ansari 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

Manoj Das Alias Manoj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Khairullah Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Niraj Burma Alias Niraj Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nitish Kumar Jha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Birsa Toppo Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dayanand Ganjhu Alias Vishal Jee Alias Jitendra Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand