Allowed

Vivek Kumar Ray v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Oct 2021B.A./9303/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed a bail application for two petitioners in Deori P.S. Case No. 315/2020, directing removal of defects within 30 days. Relying on anticipatory bail granted to co-accused, the Court ordered release on bond with specific medical and suffix conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- with two sureties each subject to specific conditions including medical examination and appearance in court.

Vivek Kumar Ray 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. 9303 of 2021

¶3

Vivek Kumar Ray

¶4

Manoj Kumar Ray @ Manoj Kumar Ray ….. Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand ….. Opp. Party --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO -------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, A.P.P. ---------

¶5

02/Dated: 05/10/2021

¶6

Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai and learned counsel for the State, Mr. Naveen Kumar Ganjhu, Additional Public Prosecutor.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that defect no. 9 (i) i.e. B.P. no. may be corrected at para-2, defect no. 9(ii) i.e. entire brief may be correctly paginated and same may be indicated at index and defect no. 9 (iii) i.e. alias name of petitioner no. 2 is missing at page no. 1, as per Stamp Reporting dated 31.07.2021, have not been removed, which he undertakes to remove within 30 days and the bail application may be heard, as it is a regular bail application of the petitioners, who are in custody since 16.03.2021 and 07.11.2020 respectively.

¶8

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

¶9

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

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners have prayed for grant of regular bail in connection with Deori P.S. Case No. 315/2020 dated 04.11.2020 corresponding to G.R. No. 534/2021, for the offence registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 354(B), 448, 379, 427, 506 of the I.P.C.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that F.I.R. has been lodged against 30 named male and female accused

¶12

-2-

¶13

persons and the name of the petitioners transpired at serial nos. 11 & 26. It appears that there is omnibus allegation of assault, due to which one person namely, Manoranjan Rai died during treatment and thus, Section 302 of the I.P.C. has been added.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that there is case and counter case between the parties and co-accused Sandeep Rai @ Sandeep Kumar Ray has been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 23.08.2021 passed in A.B.A. No. 5555/2021 by Coordinate Bench of this Court and co-accused Asheshwar Rai, Shyamdeo Rai and Surendra Rai have been enlarged on anticipatory bail vide order dated 21.09.2021 passed in A.B.A. No. 6984/2021 by Coordinate Bench of this Court and the case of these petitioners is similarly situated to the other co-accused, who have been enlarged on bail and as such, the petitioners, who are in custody since 16.03.2021 and 07.11.2020 respectively, may also be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that these petitioners were actively participated in the occurrence.

¶16

However, he has not disputed that other co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail by Coordinate Bench of this Court.

¶17

Considering the fact that several co-accused having similar allegation have been enlarged on anticipatory bail, the petitioners who are in custody be directed to enlarge the petitioners on bail as there is no specific allegation against these petitioners and allegation are general and omnibus against all the accused persons.

¶18

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 Deori P.S. Case No. 315/2020 corresponding to G.R. No. 534/2021 to the satisfaction of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Giridih on the following conditions:

¶19

(i) One of the bailors shall be the deponent / pairvikar of the present case namely, Girish Mahtha, son of Keshari Mahtha, resident

¶20

-3-

¶21

of Village – Bhuchrobad, P.O. - Khariyodih, P.S. - Hirodih, District – Giridih, Jharkhand, who has furnished photocopy of his UID Card before this Court in the bail application.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

(iii) Petitioners shall appear before the trial court on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(vi) 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.

¶28

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶29

(Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)

¶30

Sunil/

Vivek Kumar Ray v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Kumar Ray 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.

MD Raju Alias Bijay Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gul Mohammad Vs the State of Jharkhand