The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's bail application in an FIR involving extortion and terrorizing. The Court noted the petitioner was named as a Zonal Commander of an extremist group and denied bail due to the menacing nature of the charges and pending cases against him.
Prayer for regular bail rejected.
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 B. A. No. 4972 of 2020
....
Laxman Ganjhu @ Kohram Jee .… Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party
.... CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kr. Singh, Adv. For the State : A.P.P.
The matter was taken up through Video Conferencing. Learned counsels for the parties had no objection with it and submitted that the audio and video qualities are good.
06/19.01.2021 The present application has been filed for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in connection with Pathalgadda P.S. Case No.35 of 2018 (S.T. No.198 of 2019), registered under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 323/ 325/ 307/ 302/ 452/ 379/ 385/ 387 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17(i)(ii) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is in judicial custody since 15.03.2019 and his name has been incorporated in the F.I.R. only on the basis of suspicion. It has been further submitted that there is no material available against this petitioner and further the charge has already been framed and as such the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submission has been advanced that the applicant has a criminal history and 32 cases are pending against him. It has been further submitted that the applicant is a terrorizing person of his locality and as such he does not deserve the privilege of bail.
Heard learned counsel for the parties. After perusal of record, it appears that in the present case, the arrested person has taken the name of this applicant as Zonal Commander of an extremist group and they were terrorizing the public to enhance the terror image of their supremo including this applicant.
Regard being the fact of this case, I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage. Accordingly, prayer for bail of the petitioner is, hereby, rejected.
However, trial court is directed to conclude the trial as early as possible preferably within nine months from the date of receipt/ production of a copy of this order.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
Shahid/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is eligible for regular bail considering the nature of the case involving extortion and terrorizing activities.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Laxman Ganjhu @ Kohram Jee
The State of Jharkhand
Rajesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
