Dismissed
Badsah Sk Alias Badsah Shekh v. the State of Jharkhand
Jharkhand HCB.A./8585/2023
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.…
What the court decided
AI extract
HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No.…
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 B.A. No. 8585 of 2023
------
Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA
-----For the Petitioner : Md. Yasir Arafat, Advocate For the Opp. Party : Mr. Vineet Kumar Vashistha, Spl.P.P ------
Order No. 05 Dated- 21.12.2023
Heard the learned counsels for the parties.
The petitioner is an accused in a case registered under sections 379, 411, 34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the accused. It has further been submitted that the FIR is lodged against unknown persons and neither any complaint of theft of the alleged motorcycle before the police has been made nor it has been recovered from the house of the petitioner. It has further been submitted that no any incriminating articles or motorcycle has been recovered from the conspicuous possession of the petitioner nor any TIP conducted till today. It has further been submitted that the petitioner is in custody since 01.04.2023 and he is a labour. Learned counsel has further been submitted that one of the co-accused namely Najmul Shekh @ Nazibul Sk. @ Najibul Sk. has been granted bail by this Court in B.A. No. 6223 of 2023 vide order dated 06.10.2023. therefore, the petitioner may be allowed the bail.
Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail petition and submitted that as per 16 of the case diary, the stolen motorcycle was recovered from the possession of the accusedpetitioner. Learned counsel for the State has further submitted that the petitioner has got two other criminal antecedents.
Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected at this stage.
(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.)
Umesh/uploaded
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner accused under sections 379, 411, and 34 IPC should be released on bail.
Whether the conflicting submissions regarding recovery of stolen property and antecedents warrant granting bail.
Petitioner
State
Ratnaker Bhengra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court