Single judge allowed bail to an applicant charged with cheating and forgery for allegedly defrauding victims of employment assistance money, despite opposing submissions regarding victimization.
Release on bail by furnishing bond of Rs.30,000 with two sureties of the like amount.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B.A. No.10410 of 2021
Pankaj Kumar Singh ..... … Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2.Balbir Singh …. …. Opp. Parties -------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -----For the Petitioner : Mr. A.K. Kashyap, Sr. Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Pran Pranay, Advocate --------
04/10.01.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.P.P. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant.
This bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant– Pankaj Kumar Singh with prayer to release on bail in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No.165 of 2021 registered under Sections 406/420/467/468/120-B of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st
Class, Ranchi.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the F.I.R. of this case lodged by the informant against the applicant with the allegations that he had met to one unknown person while he was in Jammu & Kashmir, who told him that one person, namely, Pankaj Kumar Singh of Jharkhand at Ranchi was known to him and he could provide job in Army in consideration of money. Believing on that person, Somraj (the relative of the informant), Sushil Kumar, Danish Kumar and Bantu contacted to Pankaj Kumar Singh on telephone, who told them that he would take Rs.5 lacs from each candidates for providing job in Army and two bank account numbers i.e., of Gopi Sharma and Sushil Tiwari were told in which the amount was to be transferred. The informant could not meet the applicant face to face, but he told to all the victims to meet in a hotel, wherein each had deposited Rs.3 lacs. Later on it was came to knowledge that it was fraud and no alleged job was ever provided. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the person, who has introduced himself to Pankaj Kumar Singh was never disclosed during investigation nor his statement was recorded by the I.O. There is no such documentary evidence against the applicant in regard to depositing any amount in his bank account by the informant or any of the victim, as alleged in the F.I.R. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 28.06.2021.
Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and contended that as per case-diary the amount of Rs.12 lacs was given to the applicant and the applicant has also victimize other persons for the same kind of offence.
-2-
In view of the submissions made and material on record, the bail application of the applicant is hereby allowed. Let the applicant be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi in aforesaid case, subject to the following conditions :-
i. The applicant will co-operate in the investigation, inquiry and trial and will not absent himself on the date fixed by the learned court below without any reasonable cause; ii. The applicant will not threaten the witness or tamper any evidence;
iii. In breach of any of the conditions, the learned court below would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant without any further reference to this Court.
Rohit
(Subhash Chand, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible to be released on bail in a cheque bounce and cheating case pending at trial stage.
Whether the non-availability of documentary evidence and lack of face-to-face meeting support the applicant's bail application.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pankaj Kumar Singh
The State of Jharkhand
Balbir Singh
Subhash Chand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
