Dismissed

Navendra Singh Alias Nawendra Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 Oct 2023A.B.A./7594/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in an FIR involving extortion at the point of firearms and unlawful arms possession. The High Court rejecting the petition, citing the serious nature of allegations and the petitioner's criminal antecedents warranting custodial interrogation.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail rejected.

Navendra Singh Alias Nawendra Singh Vs the State of… — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 7594 of 2023

¶2

Navendra Singh @ Nawendra Singh

¶3

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶4

------

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Addl. P.P. ------

¶7

Order No.02 Dated- 06.10.2023

¶8

Heard the parties.

¶9

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Anandpur P.S. Case No.12 of 2023 registered under sections 385/387/120B of the Indian Penal Code, under section 25(1B)a/26/35 of the Arms Act and under section 17 of the C.L.A. Act.

¶10

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is involved in demand of extortion and levy from the contractor at the point of fire arms. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and the petitioner has been implicated in this case only on the basis of the disclosure of the co-accused persons. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been convicted in one case but he is on bail. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶11

Learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that the petitioner is convict of a case and in view of the serious nature of allegation of demand of extortion at the point of fire arm, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required during the investigation of the case for recovery of the fire arm and the details of the modus operandi and the other persons involved in the gang. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶12

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of demand of extortion at the point of fire arm and the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the investigation during the investigation of the case as well as the criminal antecedent of the petitioner, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

¶13

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶14

Sonu/Gunjan-

Navendra Singh Alias Nawendra Singh v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Navendra Singh Alias Nawendra 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

I S Rao Alias I Srinuvasa Rao Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anurag Tiwari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Totan Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jhajee Munda Vs the Union of India through the General Manager South Eastern Railway

Lakshmi Prasad Tewary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Basant Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand