Allowed

Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Chhotu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Dec 2023A.B.A./1107/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached High Court for anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in C.P. Case No. 752/2017 regarding sex and cheating offences. Court extended anticipatory bail subject to surrender conditions and bail bond.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks and furnish bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties subject to conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Chhotu Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 1107 of 2023

¶3

Umesh Kumar Singh @ Chhotu ….. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jiwanti Kumari ….. Opp. Parties --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Baibhaw Gahlaut, Advocate. For the State : Mrs. Mahua Palit, A.P.P. For the O.P. No. 2 : Mr. Subhneet Jha, Advocate. ---------

¶4

Order No. 7/Dated: 1^st December, 2023

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

Apprehending his arrest in connection with C.P. Case No. 752/2017, registered for the offence under Sections 376, 377, 387, 420, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶7

It is alleged that a complaint being C.P. Case No. 617/2016 was filed by the complainant before the CJM, Bokaro under Section 376, 377, 387, 420, 506/34 of the I.P.C., which was sent under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. for institution of case. On the basis of which, Marafari P.S. Case No. 33/2016 was instituted. It is further submitted that after investigation, the allegation levelled against the petitioner and other co-accused persons were found not true and case was found to be lodged on the mistake of fact and final form was submitted and thereafter, C.P. Case No. 752/2017 was filed by the complainant and after inquiry conducted by the learned Magistrate, cognizance has been taken for the offence registered under Sections 376, 387, 420, 506/34 of the I.P.C.

¶8

It is further alleged that petitioner has established physical relationship with the complainant’s sister on the pretext of marriage and later on flatly denied. Hence, this case was lodged.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that coaccused persons have been granted anticipatory bail in this case and the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case only to pressurize the petitioner to solemnize marriage with the complainant’s sister and now both have solemnized marriage. In this regard, an

¶10

-2-

¶11

affidavit has already been filed on behalf of the complainant / opposite party no. 2. The petitioner has no criminal background and he undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Learned A.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, but the learned counsel for the informant has admitted the fact of solemnization of marriage between the petitioner and the complainant’s sister.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M., 1^st Class, Bokaro in connection with C.P. Case No. 752/2017 subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶14

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶15

Sunil/

Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Chhotu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Kumar Singh Alias Chhotu 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

Payari Bhagtain and Ors. Vs Turiya Bhagat and Anr.

Harideo Singh and Ors. Vs Most Ambika and Ors.

Israil Ansari Vs Jhari Miyan

Satyendra Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gurubachen Kaur Vs Bihari Gope

Ajeet Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand