The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Vikash Tiwary, noting he was not named in the FIR with no assigned role. The court found insufficient material to establish complicity and granted bail subject to a bond and sureties.
The petitioner to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties.
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.11154 of 2021
Vikash Tiwary @ Priyansu Tiwari ..... … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party
-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Ajit Kr. Dubey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. --------
02/28.10.2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.
Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects, as pointed out by the office during course of the day.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner–Vikash Tiwary @ Priyansu Tiwari with prayer to release on bail in connection with Latehar P.S. Case No.67 of 2021 registered under Sections 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and no specific or general role has been assigned to the petitioner in the F.I.R. There is no cogent evidence against the petitioner. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 19th April, 2021.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and contended that petitioner is having criminal antecedent of one case.
On perusal of the F.I.R., it appears that the petitioner is not named and no role has been assigned to him. Learned A.P.P. has failed to show, whether the petitioner was identified by the injured and he also failed to show the complicity of the petitioner in commission of the crime.
In view of the submissions made and material on record, the bail application of the petitioner is deserved to be allowed.
Accordingly, the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Latehar in aforesaid case.
(Subhash Chand, J.)
Rohit
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to bail in connection with a case under Sections 307/34 IPC and Section 27 Arms Act where he is not named in the FIR.
Whether the petitioner's criminal antecedents preclude the grant of bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Vikash Tiwary @ Priyansu Tiwari
The State of Jharkhand
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
