Allowed

Ajay Mahatha Alias Ajay Kumar Mahatha v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC17 Mar 2021A.B.A./605/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case alleging unauthorized brick kiln operation and theft. The order requires the petitioner to cooperate with investigations and appear when noticed, subject to security and bond conditions.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted on furnishing cash security of Rs. 5,000/- and bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties, subject to conditions of cooperation and appearance.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 605 of 2021

¶2

Ajay Mahatha @ Ajay Kumar Mahatha … Petitioner

¶3

Versus

¶4

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kumar ,Adv. For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee , Spl. P.P.

¶7

02 / 17.03.2021 Heard the parties through Video Conferencing.

¶8

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 43 of 2020 registered under Sections 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 21 of MMDR Act, 1957.

¶9

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was running the brick kiln without valid licence and he was using the stolen coal. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and in fact, the brick kiln was already closed and no business activity was being done there. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also ready and willing to furnish sufficient security including cash security and co-accused with similar allegations has already been granted privilege of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this court vide order dated 17.09.2020 passed in ABA no. 4061 of 2020 hence, the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

The learned Spl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶11

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a

¶12

period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner shall be released on bail on furnishing cash security of Rs. 5,000/- 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 CJM, Bokaro in connection with Chandankiyari P.S. Case No. 43 of 2020 subject to the condition that the petitioner will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶13

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶14

Smita/-

Ajay Mahatha Alias Ajay Kumar Mahatha v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Mahatha Alias Ajay Kumar 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

Awanish Kumar Alias Kinu Kumar Gukpta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shivam Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritesh Kumar Ojha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ajit Kumar Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pappu Yadav Alias Pappu Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pappu Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand