Allowed

B N Shukla Alias Bhrigu Nath Shukla v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Sept 2021A.B.A./1870/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner who undertook to remove procedural defects. The bail order included conditions for surrender within six weeks, cooperation with investigation, and specific compliance regarding mobile number and Aadhar details.

What did the court decide?

Grant of anticipatory bail directed to surrender within six weeks on furnishing bond with sureties subject to conditions of cooperation and appearance before the investigating officer.

B N Shukla Alias Bhrigu Nath Shukla Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1870 of 2021

¶2

------

¶3

B.N. Shukla @ Bhrigu Nath Shukla

¶4

The State of Jharkhand 2. Manish Kumar Mohre .... .... ....Opposite Parties

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. Aashish Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, Addl.P.P For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Anurag Kashyap, Adv. : Mr. Suraj Kishore Prasad, Adv. ------

¶8

Order No.04 Dated- 07.09.2021

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

¶11

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mosabani P.S. Case No.18 of 2017 (G.R. No. 233 of 2017) registered under sections 420/406/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner being the general manager of Indian Recourse Limited (IRL) company has cheated the informant and his company namely Amrita Construction by not paying transportation charges of Rs.6,50,000/. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the bill submitted by the informant are addressed to Logisticin-charge Surda Mines, Mosabani hence, the petitioner has got nothing to do with the same. It is next submitted that the petitioner is neither a director of the said company nor he represents the said company. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsels for

¶15

the O.P. No.2 oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶16

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned ACJM, Ghatsila in connection with Mosabani P.S. Case No.18 of 2017 (G.R. No. 233 of 2017) with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Pappu/

B N Shukla Alias Bhrigu Nath Shukla v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B N Shukla Alias Bhrigu Nath Shukla 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

Raj Kishor Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anand Kumar Vishwakarma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suraj Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand

Subsash Kisku Vs the State of Jharkhand

Raghunath Sawaiya Alias Raghunath Sawaiyan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shashikant Vishwakarma Vs the State of Jharkhand