Allowed

Upendra Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC12 Apr 2023Cr.A(DB)/194/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed an appeal against a bail rejection order under the National Investigation Agency Act. The court quashed the lower court’s order and granted bail, noting the appellant was not named in the FIR, no TIP was conducted, and co-accused with similar allegations were released.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 24.01.2023 quashed and set aside. Appellant directed to be released on bail with Rs.10,000 bond and two sureties.

Upendra Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (DB) No.194 of 2023

¶3

-----

¶4

Upendra Yadav, aged about 40 years, S/o Late Saryadeo Yadav @ Jhapala Yadav, R/o Village-Goriyatwa, PO & PSHussainabad, District-Palamau, Jharkhand

¶5

¶6

CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

¶7

------For the Appellants : Mr. Sheo Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra, A.P.P.

¶8

¶9

Order No. 05 / Dated 12^th April, 2023

¶10

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 is directed against the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Palamau at Daltonganj in Bail Petition No.903 of 2022 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail has been rejected.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the appellant is absolutely innocent and has been dragged in this case on account of false allegation and even though he is not named in the F.I.R., but he is languishing in judicial custody since 18.11.2022. It has been submitted that even no TIP was conducted.

¶12

Further, the persons against whom identical allegations have been alleged i.e., Kameshwar Yadav @

¶13

¶14

Rameshwar Yadav, Ram Pravesh Yadav, Upendra Ram, Surendra Yadav and Ajesh Yadav have been directed to be released on bail by order passed by this Court in B.A. No.312 of 2017, B.A. No.328 of 2017, B.A. No.3927 of 2018 and B.A. No.1550 of 2022 respectively.

¶15

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Jharkhand has not disputed the fact that no TIP has been conducted and the appellant is not named in the F.I.R. However, it has been submitted that on basis of the confessional statement of another accused person, the complicity of the appellant has been surfaced and he has been taken into custody.

¶16

This Court, after having heard learned counsel for the parties and after taking into consideration the fact that the appellant is not named in the F.I.R. and even no TIP has been conducted.

¶17

Further, the other accused persons, against whom identical allegations have been leveled, i.e., i.e., Kameshwar Yadav @ Rameshwar Yadav, Ram Pravesh Yadav, Upendra Ram, Surendra Yadav and Ajesh Yadav, since have been directed to be released on bail, therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned order dated 24.01.2023 requires interference.

¶18

¶19

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the order dated 24.01.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Palamau at Daltonganj in Bail Petition No.903 of 2022, is hereby quashed and set aside.

¶20

In consequence thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

¶21

Accordingly, the appellant named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Palamau, in connection with Untari Road PS Case No.19 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. Case No.1007 of 2016.

¶22

The instant criminal appeal stands disposed of.

¶23

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶24

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶25

Birendra/

Upendra Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Upendra Yadav 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

Ms Bharat Coking Coal Limited through Its General Manager Sijua Area No v Sri Ashutosh Dwivedi Vs Neha Choubey

Rubi Rani Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Samim Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nathuni Singh Alias Nathuni Ji Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nathuni Singh Alias Nathuni Ji Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chetlal Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand