Allowed

Boby Sundi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC23 Aug 2022B.A./5697/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under section 394 IPC for robbery, the High Court of Jharkhand allowed the petitioner to be released on bail after considering that a co-accused with similar allegations had already been admitted to bail and the petitioner was in custody without sufficient reasons.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was directed to be released on bail by furnishing a bond of Rs.20,000 with two sureties of the like amount.

Boby Sundi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.5697 of 2022

¶2

Boby Sundi … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶3

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶4

For the Petitioner : Mr. Jitendra Nath Upadhyay, Adv. For the State : Mr. Mohua Palit, Addl. P.P.

¶5

Order No.04 Dated- 23.08.2022

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No. 163 of 2021 (G.R. No.515 of 2022) registered under sections 394 of Indian Penal Code.

¶8

As per FIR, the allegation is that on 04.12.2021 at about 6:30 pm, while the informant was doing accounting of money in his office, meanwhile, two miscreants entered into the office of informant and started assaulting the informant on the point of knife and pistol, then the informant fell down. It is further alleged that the miscreants started taking out cash from almirah and upon the protest of informant, he was brutally assaulted causing injury to him and thereafter miscreants took away Rs.9.83 lakhs and his mobile phone and fled away from the place of occurrence.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in F.I.R. It is next submitted that no incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of petitioner. The FIR was lodged against the unknown miscreants for commission of robbery and the name of petitioner has surfaced in this case merely on the basis of confessional statement of co-accused persons. Co-accused with similar allegation has already been admitted to bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.03.2022 passed in B.A. No.2664 of 2022. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case and remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial and shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the witnesses or gain over them. The petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 02.01.2022 without any rhymes and reasons. Hence the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned Addl. P.P. has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there are suficent material against the petitioner showing his involvement in the alleged offence of robbery. Hence, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record and also in view of the fact that co-accused with similar allegation has already been admitted to bail, I am inclined to release the above named petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.1^st Class, Jamshedpur in connection with Jugsalai P.S. Case No. 163 of 2021 (G.R. No.515 of 2022) with condition that petitioner shall appear physically on each and every date during the trial of case till its conclusion unless his physical appearance is dispensed with for sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and with further condition that petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidence or influence the

¶12

witnesses or gain over them.

¶13

In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions of the bail, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of petitioner and take into custody of the petitioner for the purpose of trial.

¶14

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶15

Pappu/

Boby Sundi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Boby Sundi 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 Kumar Alias Rohit Harijan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepak Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Ekram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chinta Devi Alias Bacho Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Vivek Kumar Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ishwar Sahu Vs the State of Jharkhand