Allowed

Mukesh Kumar Saw Alias Mukesh Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC7 Jul 2023B.A./5532/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted bail to Mukesh Kumar Sao in a case under Sections 379 and 411 IPC, requiring a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties, one of whom must be a relative.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on furnishing a bond of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each, one of whom shall be a relative.

Mukesh Kumar Saw Alias Mukesh Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 5532 of 2023

¶3

Mukesh Kumar Sao @ Mukesh Sow @ Mukesh Sao

¶4

…… Petitioner

¶5

Versus The State of Jharkhand ……. Opp. Party ---------

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD

¶7

---------- For the Petitioner : Mr. Randhir Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, APP

¶8

-----------

¶9

2/Dated: 07^th July, 2023

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

¶11

The petitioner is an accused in connection with Koderma P.S. Case no.13 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No.289 of 2021 registered under Section 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

It is submitted that the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that the stolen Tractor has been recovered from the premises of Jai Nagar Police Station. It is submitted that nothing has been recovered from the possession of this petitioner. It is submitted that the confessional statement of the petitioner has been obtained under coercion by the police and he has been implicated in the other case by the police. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the co-accused Balram Sao @ Balram Saw has been released by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2021 passed in B.A. No.9286 of 2021.It is submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 20.04.2023 and hence he may be enlarged on bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned APP has opposed the prayer for bail. It is submitted that although the petitioner has not been

¶14

-2-

¶15

named in the FIR but he has confessed his guilt in the confessional statement. It is submitted that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent which has come in paragraph 63 of the case diary and hence the Bail Application may be rejected.

¶16

Perused the records of this case and the order dated 25.11.2021 passed by this Court in B.A. No.9286 of 2021. 6. It appears that the petitioner is not named in the FIR. However, during course of investigation one Balram Sao @ Balram Saw was apprehended and he has disclosed the name of this petitioner as his associate. It appears that the name of the petitioner has come on the basis of the confessional statement of co-accused Balram Sao @ Balram Saw.

¶17

It appears that the said Balram Sao @ Balram Saw has been released by this Court vide order dated 25.11.2021 passed in B.A. No.9286 of 2021. 8. Considering the facts and in the circumstances of this case, the petitioner namely Mukesh Kumar Sao @ Mukesh Sow @ Mukesh Sao is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma in connection with Koderma P.S. Case no.13 of 2020, corresponding to G.R. Case No.289 of 2021, subject to the condition that one of the bailors should be own relative of the petitioner.

¶18

(Sanjay Prasad, J.)

¶19

Saket/-

Mukesh Kumar Saw Alias Mukesh Saw v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Kumar Saw Alias Mukesh Saw 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Khirod Gope Vs State of Jharkhand

Bivash Chandra Thakur Vs the State of Jharkhand

Gopal Prasad Gupta And Anr. Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Anil Kumar Das Vs Smt Mamta Kumari

Sanju Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pormani Kunkal Alias Pramanik Kunkal Vs the State of Jharkhand