Allowed

MD Imtiyaz v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Sept 2022B.A./7859/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single bench bail application in criminal case alleging lifting of cattle for slaughter. Petitioner argued for parity with co-accused granted bail. Court rejected trustworthiness but ordered bail on bonded security with sureties and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail. Bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties of like amount required. Submission of Aadhaar and mobile number mandated.

MD Imtiyaz Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)

¶2

B.A .No. 7859 of 2022

Md. Imtiyaz

… … Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand … … Opposite Party

¶7

¶8

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

¶9

For the Petitioner : Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh , Advocate For the State : Mr. Prabir Chatterjee , APP

¶10

¶11

Order No. 06 /Dated: 09th September, 2022

¶12

Heard Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh , the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Prabir Chatterjee , the learned APP for the State.

¶13

Mr. Lalan Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner himself and another co-accused were allegedly apprehended for lifting of cattle for the purpose of slaughter. It is further submitted that other co-accused, namely, Majhar Mian @ Majhar Ali with the same allegations has been granted bail in B.A. No. 5770 of 2022 vide order dated 30.05.2022 by a coordinate bench of this Court, therefore on the ground of parity, the petitioner may also be allowed bail. Moreover, he has further submitted that the petitioner is in custody from 03.06.2022 and there is no mention of criminal antecedent in the impugned order.

¶14

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application and pointed out that large number of cattle numbering 10 were being transported by the accused including the petitioner and petitioner said that he is the owner of the cattle but later on he denied and said that the cattle did not belong to him , therefore the petitioner is not trustworthy and he is involved in the offence.

¶15

Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/(rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Hazaribag in connection with Hazaribag Muffasil P.S. Case No. 83 of 2022 , on the condition that the petitioner will submit self-attested photocopy of his Aadhaar Card and also submit his

¶16

-2-

¶17

mobile number before the learned court below which he will always keep active and will not change it during pendency of this case without prior permission of the court.

¶18

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)

¶19

Sharda/

MD Imtiyaz v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Imtiyaz 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manoj Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amar Munda Alias Kande Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramdas Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Ram Alias Amti Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Maliya Bedia Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Ganjhu Alias Santosh Parahiya Vs the State of Jharkhand