Allowed

Anand Kumar Mehta Alias Anand Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Jul 2021A.B.A./904/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand issued anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving illegal transport of wooden logs, conditioned upon deposit of money, furnishing a bail bond with sureties, and cooperation with the investigation.

What did the court decide?

Grant of privilege of anticipatory bail subject to deposit of Rs.15,000, bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties, and cooperation with investigation.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 904 of 2021

¶2

Anand Kumar Mehta @ Anand Kumar @ Anand Mehta

¶3

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Shailendra Jit, Advocate For the State : Mr. P.K. Chatterjee, Spl. P.P.

¶7

------

¶8

Order No.03 Dated- 07.07.2021

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.103 of 2020 registered under section 379 of the Indian Penal Code, section 33 (1)(a)/41/42 of the Indian Forest Act and under section 29 of the Wild Life Protection Act.

¶11

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the owner of the Pick-up van which was seized by the police while transporting wooden logs illegally. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in para-3 of the supplementary affidavit dated 23.03.2021. It is then submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit Rs.15,000/- with the Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribagh without prejudice to his defence in this case and undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on showing the proof of deposit of Rs.15,000/- with the Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribagh without prejudice to his defence in this 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 S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh, in connection with Ichak P.S. Case No.103 of 2020 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.

¶15

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶16

Sonu/Gunjan-

Anand Kumar Mehta Alias Anand Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Kumar Mehta Alias Anand Kumar 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

Ram Pravesh Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ravi Kant Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pawan Kumar Dangi Alias Pawan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chotelal Karmali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Prasadi Prasad Alias Prasadi Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Bhim Majee Alias Ananta Majee Vs the State of Jharkhand