Allowed

Alauddin Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC29 Sept 2021A.B.A./7289/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Jharkhand High Court granted anticipatory bail to two petitioners facing charges of illegal slaughter of bovine animals under the JVSPS Act and PCCA, 1960, subject to deposit of security and furnishing guarantee bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions to deposit Rs. 20,000/- cash security and bond with two sureties, appear when noticed, and not change mobile number.

Alauddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7289 of 2021

¶2

Alauddin Ansari

¶3

Laltu Ansari @ Jalaluddin Ansari

¶4

… Petitioners Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶6

------

¶7

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioners : Mr. Praveen Shankar Dayal, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, Spl. P.P.

¶9

------

¶10

Order No.02 Dated- 29.09.2021

¶11

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶12

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Ichagarh P.S. Case No.35 of 2021 registered under section 414 of the Indian Penal Code, section 12 of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005 and under section 11 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animal Act, 1960.

¶13

The Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were involved in slaughtering of bovine animals illegally for selling their flesh. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners have no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-13 of the instant anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to furnish sufficient security including cash security and undertake to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Spl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶15

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 petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, they shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.20,000/- each and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Seraikella, in connection with Ichagarh P.S. Case No.35 of 2021 with the condition that the petitioners will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish their mobile number and a copy of their Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Sonu/Gunjan-

Alauddin Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alauddin Ansari 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

Sanjay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pushplata Alias Pushpalata Kumari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Laxman Ravidas Alias Laxman Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sidhi Pandey Alias Sidhi Nath Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Neeraj Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand