In an application for anticipatory bail under Section 3 of the R.P. (U.P.) Act, the Court rejected the petition due to recovery of incriminating items and the petitioner's criminal antecedents, directing surrender for regular bail.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks for regular bail.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1578 of 2023
------
Jitendra Kumar .... .... …. Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand .... .... ....Opposite Party
------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajiv Kumar Karan, Advocate For the State : Mr. Tarun Kumar, Addl.P.P ------
Order No. 02 Dated- 20.03.2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Dhanbad R.P.F. Post Case No. 23 of 2021 instituted under Section 3 of R.P. (U.P.) Act, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
As per FIR allegation is that on 02.07.2021, the informant Kundan Kumar S.I. of RPF Post-Dhanbad was in patrolling duty along with other RPF personnel. It is said that in course of patrolling, one suspected person was apprehended along with plastic sack. On search, two pieces of wash basin of Railway coach were found and on enquiry he disclosed his name as Pintu Bhuiyan. It is alleged that apprehended person has also disclosed that he had stolen four wash basins and out those, two has been sold to the present petitioner. It is further alleged that the said accused person was brought to the godown of the petitioner where two basins in a plastic bag were found lying and seized.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that earlier petitioner having one case R.P.F. Post Case No.21 of 2021 in which he has been granted anticipatory bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 05.10.2021 in A.B.A. No.7474 of 2021. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
-2-
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that there is recovery from the possession of the petitioner and he has criminal antecedents also, hence, he does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances and the criminal background of the petitioner, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, which stands rejected.
Petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks and pray for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the same on its own merits, without being prejudiced by this order.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
R.S./-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail in an FIR alleging theft of railway equipment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
JITENDRA KUMAR
THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
