Allowed

Krishna Mahatha Alias Krishna Kr Mahatha v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC19 Mar 2021A.B.A./226/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges for theft and illegal possession of arms. Bail was conditionally granted subject to deposit of cash security and furnishing further bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to deposit of Rs. 50,000 cash security and furnishing of bail bond with sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.

Krishna Mahatha Alias Krishna Kr Mahatha Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 226 of 2021

¶2

Krishna Mahatha @ Krishna Kr Mahatha ….........Petitioner

¶3

Vrs.

¶4

The State of Jharkhand ….......... Opposite Party …....

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE APARESH KUMAR SINGH

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K.Sahani, Advocate For the State : Mr. Suraj Verma, A.P.P.

¶7

03 /19.03.2021 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. A.K.Sahani and Mr. Suraj Verma, learned A.P.P.

¶8

Petitioner seeks protection of anticipatory bail in terms of Section 438 Cr.P.C. in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No. 68 of 2020 for the offence registered under Section 461,379 (under Section 395 and 412) of the I.P.C and Section 25(1-b), 26 and 35 of the Arms Act, pending in the court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that F.I.R was registered on allegation of theft of country made liquor, foreign liquor, beer, camera, DPR, monitor and dongle from the godown of SOM Distilleries and Beverage Limited against unknown. In course of investigation three persons were arrested and on confessional statement of one Rahul Mahata, involvement of petitioner was suspected. As per the materials collected during investigation, petitioner’s truck was being used for transportation of the stolen materials. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner’s truck was engaged in transporting Iron Ore for Electro Steel Limited, Bokaro. On 23.05.2020 the said truck loaded with Iron Ore started from Odisha and reached Electro Steel, Bokaro on 25.05.2020. After unloading Iron Ore, the truck was parked in a Garage at Chas for repairing. No recovery has been made from the possession of the petitioner and there is no criminal antecedent against him. Therefore, he may be protected from unnecessary arrest on such far fetched allegations.

¶10

Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer. He submits that though petitioner’s name has transpired from the confessional statement of the co-accused and the investigation is still continuing.

¶11

-2-

¶12

I have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and taken note of the aforesaid facts and circumstances. Having regard to the fact that petitioner has no criminal antecedent and moreover he has been implicated on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner subject to the deposit of cash security of Rs.50,000/-.

¶13

Accordingly, petitioner, above named, shall deposit a cash security of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand) in the court below and in the event of his surrender or arrest within in a period of 4 weeks, he shall be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in connection with Pindrajora P.S. Case No. 68 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶14

Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation of the case and that he and his bailors will not change their mobile number and address without prior permission of the learned Trial Court during the pendency of the case.

¶15

(Aparesh Kumar Singh, J.)

¶16

A.Mohanty

Krishna Mahatha Alias Krishna Kr Mahatha v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Mahatha Alias Krishna Kr Mahatha 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

Amit Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kanhaiya Sao Alias Kanhaiya Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abbas Ansari Alias Abbas Mian Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rameshwar Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Shamsher Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Surajdeo Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand