The High Court of Jharkhand allowed bail for the petitioner. Despite antecedents and allegations against a banned organization, the court found it inclined to release him as he was not named in the FIR and his confessor had already obtained bail.
Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties.
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. 2734 of 2022
Rakesh Ganjhu .…..... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand. ………… Opp. Party
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ananda Sen
…… For the Petitioner : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajendra Ram Ravi Das, A.P.P.
2/21.03.2022 Defect, pointed out by the office, are hereby ignored for the present.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State and have gone through the impugned order.
The petitioner is an accused for allegedly committing offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 506, 387 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 17 of C.L.A. Act.
Counsel for the petitioner submits that on the basis of the confessional statement this petitioner has been made an accused. He submits that the co-accused Bideo Munda, on whose confessional statement this petitioner has been made an accused, has already been granted bail, which is apparent from the impugned order itself.
Some unknown persons called the informant and threatened him to stop the construction work carried out for underground water supply project. It is alleged that the accused belongs to a banned organization.
From the impugned order, I find that the name of this petitioner transpired on the confessional statement of Bideo Munda, who has been granted bail. Though there is antecedent against this petitioner, yet considering the fact that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and the coaccused, who has named the petitioner, has already been granted bail, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh in connection with Charhi P.S. Case No. 84 of 2020 (G.R. No. 1185 of 2021), subject to the condition that the petitioner will personally appear before the Trial Court once a month and will mark his attendance till completion of the trial, failing which, his bail bond shall stand cancelled and the Trial Court will take all steps for his re-arrest.
( Ananda Sen, J )
Mukund/-cp.3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner, an accused appearing in a co-accused's confessional statement but not named in the FIR and whose sponsor has been granted bail, is eligible for release on bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rakesh Ganjhu
The State of Jharkhand
Ananda Sen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
