Allowed

Munni Devi Alias Garima Agrawal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Mar 2021B.A./2134/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand enlarged the petitioner on bail in a forgery and cheating case resulting in a cheque dishonour. The court accepted the petitioner's undertaking to remove stamp defects, ignoring the stamp reporter's defects, and directed release upon furnishing a bond.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each.

Munni Devi Alias Garima Agrawal Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2134 of 2021

¶2

Munni Devi @ Garima Agrawal @ Garima Agarwal

¶3

… Petitioner

¶4

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

------ For the Petitioner : Mr. M.K. Sinha (2), Advocate For the State : Mrs. Niki Sinha, Addl. P.P. ------

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 03.03.2021

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Bermo P.S. Case No.130 of 2020 (G.R. No.816 of 2020) registered under sections 467/468/471/420 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner on the basis of forged documents has purchased a vehicle after paying Rs.18,000/- through cheque but the said cheque was dishonoured. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 10.11.2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail application and charge sheet has been submitted in this case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

¶14

The learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

¶15

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail

¶16

on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat, in connection with Bermo P.S. Case No.130 of 2020 (G.R. No.816 of 2020) with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Sonu-Gunjan/

Munni Devi Alias Garima Agrawal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munni Devi Alias Garima Agrawal 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

Sajid Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Samsher Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand

Muzaffar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mithilesh Murmu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Markus Bhengra Alias Shooter Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suresh Lohar Alias Suresh Kumar Lohara Vs the State of Jharkhand