A single judge rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in a theft case, citing the recovery of evidence from his possession and his criminal antecedents as grounds.
Application for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioner directed to surrender within four weeks.
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. 1726 of 2023
| Mithun Tanti | ------ .... Versus |
.... |
…. | Petitioner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The State of Jharkhand | .... | .... | ....Opposite Party |
------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----For the Petitioner : Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Gautam Rakesh, Addl.P.P ------
Order No. 02 Dated- 20.03.2023
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Seraikella P.s. Case No. 121 of 2022 instituted under Section 414/34 of IPC, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
As per FIR allegation is that on 20.10.2022 at about 18.20 O’clock, in the night, when the informant along with police party was on patrolling, got a secret information that some people are engaged in stealing iron rod, Aluminum wire and other ore from premises Abhijeet Company and for its verification, when the informant reached at Village Dasiadih at about 19.15 O’clock, they saw 4-5 motorcycles standing near the busehes and some people are coming towards the motorcycle, carrying heavy luggage on their shoulders and seeing the police party. It is alleged that out of them, three persons have been arrested at the spot and 6-7 persons succeeded in fleeding away and on interrogation, the arrested persons disclosed their names as Ranga Bari, Dinesh Nayak, Faizal Sheikh. On search, three bundles of aluminum, some pieces of iron road and other articles along with five motorcycles have been recovered and seized by the police party at the place of occurrence.
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. Hence, it is submitted
-2-
that the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
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./-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a case involving theft of iron rods and aluminum wire under Section 414/34 IPC.
Whether the petitioner's criminal antecedents and recovery from his possession disentitle him to anticipatory bail.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mithun Tanti
The State of Jharkhand
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
