Partly allowed

Sunil Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC21 Jun 2023A.B.A./1392/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail matter before the Jharkhand High Court, Justice Ambuj Nath allowed withdrawal of one petitioner's application. The court enlarged remaining petitioners on anticipatory bail in connection with offences under various sections of IPC and other acts, directing surrender within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted for withdrawal of one petitioner's application; Anticipatory bail granted to remaining petitioners with direction to surrender within two weeks.

Sunil Kumar Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 1392 of 2023

¶3

Sunil Kumar Singh

¶4

Pappu Saw @ Dharamveet Kumar Gupta

¶5

Gautam Saw @ Gautam Sahu @ Gautam Kumar Sahu

¶6

Jitu Singh @ Jitendra Kumar Singh

¶7

Chandan Singh @ Chandan Sikaowar

¶8

Pritam Ray @ Pritam Kumar Ray @ Pritam Rai

¶9

Sonu Singh @ Sonu Kumar

¶10

Vijay Ram

¶11

Ashok Singh 10. Ashok Yadav 11. Prakash Thakur … … Petitioners - Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party

¶12

¶13

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶14

----For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.P.P. ----

¶15

03/21.06.2023

¶16

Learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the Anticipatory Bail Application of petitioner No.11 Prakash Thakur on the ground that the petitioner has been arrested.

¶17

Prayer is allowed.

¶18

Accordingly, the Anticipatory Bail Application of petitioner No.11 Prakash Thakur is dismissed as withdrawn.

¶19

Heard the parties.

¶20

Petitioners are apprehending their arrest in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 367/2016, for the offences registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 295, 295A, 298, 307, 353, 379, 427, 436 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 5, 6, 15 of the E.P. Act and Section 9 of the Loudspeaker Act, pending in the court of learned C.J.M., Hazaribag.

¶21

Case diary earlier called for, has been received. Perused the same.

¶22

It is alleged that on 17.04.2016, the people of particular community attacked Ramnawmi procession and also vandalized the idol of lord Hanuman. The members of the procession became agitated and they vandalized the shops and houses of members of the particular community. They also vandalized the A.T.M. of HDFC Bank.

¶23

From the perusal of the case diary, it appears that none of the witnesses have spelt out the name of the petitioners. It appears that name

¶24

-2-

¶25

of the petitioners had transpired on the basis of confidential information.

¶26

Mrs. Priya Shrestha, learned Spl.P.P. after going though the case diary has conceded these facts.

¶27

Regard being had to the facts and circumstance of the case, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. They are directed to surrender before the court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and learned court below on their surrender shall release them on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/(Twenty five Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Hazaribag in connection with Sadar P.S. Case No. 367/2016. Subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

¶28

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶29

Jay/-

Sunil Kumar Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Singh 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

Binay Kumar Ram Vs State of Jharkhand

Sudeep Kr Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjay Chakraborty Alias Sanjay Kr Chakrabortty Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amarnath Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Churaman Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shivyogi Amrappa Balikai Alias Shivayogi Balikai Vs the State of Jharkhand