High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a cheating and property dispute case, conditioning release on money deposit and future compliance with legal formalities.
Petitioner relieved from apprehension of arrest and permitted anticipatory bail subject to deposit and bail conditions.
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 A.B.A. No. 2365 of 2021
Bimal Ranjan Tigga … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------ For the Petitioner : Mrs. Rakhi Rani, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Snehlika Bhatat, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Vishal Kumar, Advocate ------
Order No.03 Dated- 13.07.2021
Heard the parties through video conferencing.
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.
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.
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Sukhdeonagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No.422 of 2018 registered under sections 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code.
The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has taken an advance of Rs.3,40,000/- from the informant for selling the land but he is neither returning the money nor executing sale deed. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has only taken Rs.1,00,000/- and not Rs.3,40,000/- as claimed by the informant. It is then submitted that there is an inordinate delay in institution of the complaint which upon being referred to police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., the FIR of this case has been registered. It is then submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to pay Rs. 3,40,000/- to the informant without prejudice to his defence in this case, subject to final decision of the case and undertakes to cooperate with the
investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.
Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing a demand draft of Rs. 3,40,000/- drawn in favour of informant without prejudice to his defence in this case, subject to final decision of the case and 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 J.M., Ranchi, in connection with Sukhdeonagar (Pandra O.P.) P.S. Case No.422 of 2018 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.
In case, the petitioner deposits the ad interim victim compensation amount, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant and hand over the said demand draft to her, after proper identification.
At the time of conclusion of the trial, the trial court will pass appropriate order regarding the money if any, deposited by the petitioner with the informant.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )
Sonu/Gunjan-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Case No.422 of 2018.
Whether the petitioner's personal undertaking to remove defects suffices to meet concerns raised by the stamp reporter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Bimal Ranjan Tigga
The State of Jharkhand
Anil Kumar Choudhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
