Allowed

Rajendra Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC24 Feb 2022A.B.A./1201/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner facing charges under the Electricity Act for alleged theft of electric energy. The petitioner was directed to surrender within four months and meet bail conditions including a deposit and surrendering documents, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted with conditions to surrender within four months, deposit Rs.10,000, and furnish bail bond with two sureties.

Rajendra Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand — Narcotics (NDPS) | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.1201 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

Rajendra Pandit

¶4

.... .... …. Petitioner

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand

¶7

.... .... .... Opposite Party

¶8

------

¶9

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶10

For the Petitioner : Mr. Diwakar Jha, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajiv Ranjan, Addl.P.P For the J.B.V.N.L. : Mr. Nilesh Kumar, Advocate

¶11

Order No.02 Dated- 24.02.2022

¶12

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after resumption of the court in physical mode.

¶14

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

¶15

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No.203 of 2021 instituted under Sections 135 and 137 of the Indian Electricity Act, 2003, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶16

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner committed theft of electric energy and caused loss to the tune of Rs.10,000/- to the Electricity Department. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. Drawing attention of this Court towards para-17 of the instant bail application, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and to deposit Rs.10,000/- with the J.B.V.N.L., Koderma without prejudice to his defence in this case subject to final decision of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶17

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the J.B.V.N.L. oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶18

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail

¶19

to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Koderma within four months from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on showing proof of deposit of Rs.10,000/- with the J.B.V.N.L., Koderma and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Koderma in connection with Jainagar P.S. Case No.203 of 2021 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency

¶20

of case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶21

In case the petitioner deposits Rs.10,000/- with the J.B.V.N.L., Koderma in connection with this case, learned court below will pass an appropriate order regarding the same at the time of conclusion of trial.

¶22

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶23

Animesh/

Rajendra Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Pandit 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

Rohit Ravidas Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vijay Kumar Thakur Vs The Union Of India Through Central Bureau Of Investigation

Jai Prakash Kahar Alias Jai Prakash Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Aklu Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rakesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Malti Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand