Allowed

MD Raju Alias Bijay Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Oct 2021B.A./9300/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment deals with a bail application filed by two petitioners in custody. The High Court, while allowing the bail application, imposed specific conditions including a monetary bond, sureties, residence verification, and special reporting requirements for the petitioner with prior criminal antecedents, amidst the pandemic.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties, subject to conditions including police reporting for one petitioner and medical quarantine verification.

MD Raju Alias Bijay Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)

¶2

B.A. No. 9300 of 2021

¶3

Md. Raju @ Bijay Munda & Anr. ….. Petitioners Versus State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO --------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P. ---------

¶4

02/Dated: 05/10/2021

¶5

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Chandrajit Mukherjee and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that defect no.5 (e) i.e. vak. appears to be scanned copy and not in original, 9(i) i.e. District name of deponent may be stated at affidavit, 9(iii) i.e. Name of petitioner no.2 stated at page no.1 and vak differ from impugned order, 9(iv) i.e. Resident of petitioner no.1 stated at page no.1 and vak differ and 9(v) i.e. G.R. No. may be stated at para-1 & prayer, as per Stamp Reporting dated 05.08.2021, has not been removed, which he undertakes to remove within 30 days from today and prayed that the bail application may be heard, as it is regular bail application of the petitioners, who are in custody since 29.10.2020.

¶7

Considering the same, this Court is inclined to hear the instant bail application on merits, but with condition that petitioners shall remove the defect within 30 days from today.

¶8

Joint Registrar (Judicial) is directed to ensure the compliance of this order.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners have prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Jadugora P.S. Case No.33/2020, for the offence registered under Sections 461/379/411/34 IPC, pending in the court of learned ACJM, Ghatsila.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that FIR has been lodged against unknown with an allegation that unknown thieves have broken the shutter on 22.06.2020 and took away the

¶11

-2-

¶12

articles worth Rs.1,20,000/- comprising tyre, tubes, rim including table fan.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that on the basis of confession made by the co-accused some of the articles have been recovered from the possession of petitioner no.2, Suraj Thapa @ Suraj Bahadur, as such, he has also been made an accused in this case and they are in custody since 29.10.2020 as such, considering the period of custody, petitioners may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State, Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, Additional Public Prosecutor has opposed the prayer and has submitted that petitioner no.1 has criminal antecedent of similar nature including few cases under Section 394 IPC and so far petitioner no.2 is concerned, there is no criminal antecedent.

¶15

Considering the rival submissions of the parties, looking into the facts and circumstances of the case, as petitioners are in custody since 29.10.2020, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each in connection with Jadugora P.S. Case No.33/2020 to the satisfaction of learned ACJM, Ghatsila on the following conditions:

¶16

(i) One of the bailors shall be the deponent / pairvikar of the present case namely, Puja Kumari, D/o Nandlal Tanti, resident of Village – Epilsingi Ward 8, P.O. & P.S. - Manjhari, Kheriatanagar, District – East Singhbhum, who has furnished photocopy of his UID Card before this Court in the bail application.

¶17

Office is directed to send the photocopy of UID Card of deponent along with this order to the court below so as to verify the authenticity of the bailor.

¶18

(ii) Another bailor shall be father / mother / son / wife of the petitioners.

¶19

(iii) Petitioners shall appear before learned trial court on each and every date till conclusion of the trial. So far the petitioner no.1, who

¶20

-3-

¶21

has criminal antecedent is concerned, he shall also report on 1^st of each English calendar month before the Officer In-charge, Jadugora Police Station and shall put signature on the register maintained by the Officer In-charge till conclusion of the trail.

¶22

(iii) The Jail Authority shall release the petitioners only after their medical check-up.

¶23

(iv) The Civil Surgeon, East Singhbhum is directed to medically examine the petitioner at the time of their release and if they are infected with corona virus, he shall be taken for quarantine, but if no such requirement is there, they shall be released forthwith, if not wanted in any other case.

¶24

(v) The petitioners shall follow all the guidelines issued by the Government to meet the challenges of Covid-19, as presently Country is passing through pandemic of Covid-19.

¶25

(vi) Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶26

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶27

Jay/

MD Raju Alias Bijay Munda v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Raju Alias Bijay Munda 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

Ashok Kumar Sao Alias Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajesh Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sk Faquruddin Alias Rajesh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Barnabas Tigga And Anr. Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Gul Mohammad Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vivek Kumar Ray Vs the State of Jharkhand