Allowed

Goutam Gorai Alias Goutam Gorain v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Feb 2021B.A./198/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's bail application in a case involving the abducting of a minor, ignoring stamp defects due to a legal undertaking to remove them within two weeks and ordering release on bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was enlarged on bail to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge on furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and a condition to cooperate with the trial.

Goutam Gorai Alias Goutam Gorain Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.198 of 2021

¶2

Goutam Gorai @ Goutam Gorain … Petitioner Versus

¶3

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶4

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Adv. For the State : Mr. S.K. Dubey, Addl. P.P.

¶6

02 /03.02.2021 Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶7

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

¶8

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.

¶9

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No. 187 of 2020 registered under sections 366-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner enticed away the minor victim girl. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards Annexure-3 at page nos.20-21 of the brief, which is the copy of the certified copy of the joint compromise petition filed by the parties in the court of Additional Sessions Judge 1^st , Seraikella, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the parties have compromised the matter outside of the court and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has categorically stated that she had gone with the co-accused person to enjoy durga puja fair and denied that she has been taken away by co-accused for the purpose of marriage. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 28.10.2020 as mentioned in paragraph 14 of the bail application. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be released on bail.

¶11

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering the facts of this case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/(Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount

¶13

each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Seraikella in connection with Chandil P.S. Case No. 187 of 2020 with the condition that he will cooperate with the trial of the case.

¶14

Pappu/

¶15

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)

Goutam Gorai Alias Goutam Gorain v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Goutam Gorai Alias Goutam Gorain 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

Ranjeet Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pankaj Das Alias Pankaj Kumar Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pappu Patel Alias Harsh Agarwal Alias Pappu Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Danish Alias MD Danish Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jaikant Kumar Singh Alias Jaykant Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand