Allowed

Champay Chandra Shekhar Dangil v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Aug 2022A.B.A./4388/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to an applicant falsely implicated in a case regarding forged recruitment documents. The order allowed release subject to a bond and conditions preventing tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of the like amount subject to standard conditions.

Champay Chandra Shekhar Dangil Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4388 of 2022

¶2

Champay Chandra Shekhar Dangil …. ….. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶3

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. V.K. Tiwary, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, A.P.P.

¶5

5/03.08.2022 Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned APP for the State.

¶6

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed applicant seeking anticipatory bail in connection with Chaibasa (Mufassil) P.S. Case No.14 of 2022, registered under section 124A, 153A, 153B, 420, 467, 505(1)(b) &120B of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned A.C.J.M, at Chaibasa.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the FIR of this case was lodged against 9 named accused and unknown persons by the District Employment Officer, Chaibasa with these allegations that one day training camp for the forged recruitment was to be organised under the banner of Chibasa Kolhan Govt. State. The informant along with other officers and police force conducted raid, having seen the police the persons present at place managed to flee away while some persons were apprehended at the spot who were named in the FIR. On queries the apprehended persons told that they had assembled there for the purpose of recruitment and one Anand Chatar had professed to be Khewat Malik No.1 and about 1000 persons were given appointment. On search, register for the appointment of 541 persons, printer, laptop and several articles were also recovered.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that in the FIR, there is no allegations against the applicant. Subsequently, he has been falsely implicated in this case. The applicant has no concern with the alleged group of co-accused and he is having no criminal antecedent.

¶9

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the present application pending or calling for counter affidavit

¶11

from the State. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail, at this stage.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the above named applicant involved in the aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail, on his furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/-(Rupees twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶13

i. The applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.

¶14

ii. The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

iii. In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶16

iv. The applicant shall co-operate in the trial before the court below and in case of non-cooperation, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant without any reference to this Court.

¶17

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶18

Tarun

Champay Chandra Shekhar Dangil v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Champay Chandra Shekhar Dangil 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

Naro Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Jawed Alias MD Javed Vs the State of Jharkhand

Saidun Bibi Alias Sahidun Bibi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Guddan Singh Alias Vishwas Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand