MD Akbar Alias Akbar Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2024)

MD Akbar Alias Akbar Miyan Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Privilege of anticipatory bail granted to petitioner no.1 Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan: surrender within three weeks, and release on surrender/arrest on a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to section 438(2) CrPC conditions; the prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of petitioner no.2 was dismissed as not pressed.

Issue for consideration

Whether the privilege of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners apprehending arrest in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.126 of 2023. +1 more

Court's answer

As petitioner no.2 (Md.Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari) had already been apprehended, the court dismissed his prayer for anticipatory bail as not pressed.

Ratio / Principle

Criminal antecedent is not the only criteria either to allow or reject a bail/anticipatory bail application.

Key takeaways

Considering that the coal was purchased for the petitioner's own use and that the petitioner will cooperate in the investigation, the court was inclined to provide the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner no.1 Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan despite the criminal antecedent reported by State counsel.ratio¶¶17
Petitioner no.1 Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan is directed to surrender before the court within three weeks from the date of judgment.ratio¶¶18
In the event of surrender/arrest, petitioner no.1 Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan shall be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL — PARTLY GRANTED: High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi (Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, 02.05.2024), A.B.A. No. 1012 of 2024. Petitioners Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan (no.1) and Md. Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari (no.2) sought anticipatory bail in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.126 of 2023 (sections 379, 413, 414, 34 IPC; section 30(ii) Coal Mines Act), pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. As petitioner no.2 had been apprehended, his prayer was dismissed as not pressed. For petitioner no.1, learned counsel asserted the coal in question had been purchased for making bricks for construction of his house and undertook cooperation in investigation; State counsel opposed on grounds of criminal antecedent and non-cooperation. The court held criminal antecedent is 'not the only criteria either to allow or reject the bail/ anticipatory bail application', and considering purchase for own use and expected cooperation, granted the privilege of anticipatory bail to petitioner no.1 — directing surrender within three weeks and release on surrender/arrest on a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the CJM, Giridih, subject to section 438(2) CrPC conditions.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI

A.B.A. No. 1012 of 2024

----

1.Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan

2.Md.Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari.... Petitioners

The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

For the Petitioners	:-	Mr. Prashant Kumar Rai, Advocate
For the State	:-	Mr. B.N. Ojha, Advocate
		----

4 /02.05.2024 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned counsel for the State.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner no.2 namely Md.Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari has been apprehended and in view of that he is not pressing the instant petition on behalf of the petitioner no.2 namely Md.Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari and accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail on behalf of the petitioner no.2 namely Md.Samim Ansari @ Tinku Ansari @ Samim Ansari is dismissed as not pressed.

The petitioner no.1 is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.126 of 2023, for the offence registered under sections 379, 413, 414, 34 of the IPC and section 30(ii) of Coal Mines Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has purchased the coal in question and the allegation is made that three tons of coal was loaded on the pick up van and he submits that the said coal was purchased for making bricks for construction of his house and he submits that

--1--

the petitioner will cooperate in the investigation.

Learned State counsel opposed the prayer on the ground that the petitioner is having the criminal antecedent and he is not cooperating in the investigation.

Considering that coal was purchased for own use and the petitioner will cooperate in the investigation and further the criminal antecedent is not the only criteria either to allow or reject the bail/ anticipatory bail application, and in the attending facts and circumstances, I am inclined to provide privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner no.1 namely Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan.

Accordingly, the petitioner no.1 namely Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan, is hereby directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today, and in the event of his surrender/arrest, the petitioner no.1 namely Md. Akbar @ Akbar Miyan, shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand), with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih, in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No.126 of 2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

SI/

--2--