Allowed

Suraj Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC18 Oct 2021A.B.A./7589/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants anticipatory bail to the petitioner in an action under Sections 406/420/381 IPC. The Court conditionally releases the petitioner upon arrest or surrender within six weeks upon furnishing a bail bond and meeting specified conditions to cooperate with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted conditionally upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, subject to furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties and complying with investigation conditions.

Suraj Kumar Verma Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7589 of 2021

¶2

Suraj Kumar Verma … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶3

------

¶4

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶5

For the Petitioner : Mr. P.P.N. Roy, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mrs. Vandana Bharti, Addl. P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Manish Kumar, Advocate

¶6

------

¶7

Order No.02 Dated- 18.10.2021

¶8

Heard the parties.

¶9

Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks.

¶10

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶11

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Mango (Olidih) P.S. Case No.115 of 2021 registered under sections 406/420/381 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

The Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the main allegation is against the co-accused-Prashant Gorai who was working as a supervisor in the Utility Transport Company was authorized for getting the transport vehicle filled with diesel through Indian Oil Company and was involved in manipulating the records of the said company and has illegally earned 20-25 lakhs and in his confessional statement the said coaccused person -Prashant Gorai has stated that the petitioner and others helped in materializing the defalcation and has particularly stated about the co-accused Madan Pramanik being benefited from the defalcated amount to the extent of 10% of the said amount illegally earned by Prashant Gorai and co-accused person - Prashant Gorai has further stated that out of Rs.5,00,000/-

¶13

deposited by the co-accused with their employer, the petitioner has contributed Rs.1,00,000/- which amount the petitioner took from co-accused person -Prashant Gorai to remain silent. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the main allegation is against co-accused Prashant Gorai and Madan Mohan Pramanik. It is then submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶14

Learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant 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 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 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. 1^st Class, Jamshedpur, in connection with Mango (Olidih) P.S. Case No.115 of 2021 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.

¶16

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶17

Sonu/Gunjan-

Suraj Kumar Verma v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Kumar Verma 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gautam Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abhinav Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pintu Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Imran Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Aehtab Ansari Alias Aftab Hussain Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pappu Rana Vs the State of Jharkhand