Dismissed

Suresh Mahto Alias Suresh Prasad Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC25 Aug 2023A.B.A./4993/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this appeal against rejection of anticipatory bail, the High Court of Jharkhand rejected the prayer, noting the petitioner’s named status via co-accused confession and criminal antecedents, and directed surrender for regular bail.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; directed to surrender and seek regular bail from lower court.

Suresh Mahto Alias Suresh Prasad Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand — Corruption | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A No. 4993 of 2023

¶2

Suresh Mahto @ Suresh Prasad Mahto ……. Petitioner Versus State of Jharkhand ..….. . Opposite Party

¶3

--------CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶4

---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Naveen Kr. Jaiswal, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Priya Shrestha, Spl.PP ----------- 06/Dated: 25^th August, 2023

¶5

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.121 of 2021registered under Sections 272/273/414/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 47(a) of Excise Act.

¶6

As per FIR, it is alleged that on receiving information of road accident the informant reached near the Nawadih Bridge and found several people are assembled and he had seen there one four wheeler bearing Registration No.BR 21P 5264, one motorcycle and three persons in injured condition. On search the police recovered 51 Cartoons containing 120 pieces, 144 pieces, 12 pieces and 192 pieces total approx 468 bottles of English Liquor. 3. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and nothing has been recovered from his possession. However, during course of investigation it transpires that petitioner is involved in this case and as such he may be enlarged on bail.

¶7

On the other hand, learned Spl.PP appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that the petitioner is not named in the FIR but he is the prime accused and huge quantity of liquor has been recovered by the informant. It is submitted that petitioner is named in this case by the co-accused Ranjit Kumar and Sushil Kumar Tudu on their confessional statements, have

¶8

-2-

¶9

named this petitioner, who had been apprehended by the police. It is submitted that the petitioner has got Nine (09) criminal antecedent.

¶10

It appears that the petitioner has been named in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused namely Ranjit Kumar and Sushil Kumar Tudu respectively.

¶11

It also appears that the petitioner is involved in clandestine liquor business and hence, I am not inclined to allow the anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence the prayer for anticipatory bail is rejected.

¶12

The petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court below and pray for grant of regular bail before the learned court below, which shall be disposed of on its own merit without being prejudiced by the order passed by this Court.

¶13

Thus, the A.B.A No.4993 of 2023 is hereby rejected.

¶14

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶15

Saket/-

Suresh Mahto Alias Suresh Prasad Mahto v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Mahto Alias Suresh Prasad Mahto 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

Gurpreet Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Uma Shankar Saraogi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munna Dhobi Alias Sonu Kumar Rajak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shekh Abbas Alias Abbas Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ramjee Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anil Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand