Imran Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Imran Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Regular bail granted to the petitioner on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal, subject to conditions of attendance at trial, abstention from similar offences, and non-tampering with prosecution evidences/witnesses, failing which bail stands cancelled.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, charged under Section 364A/34 IPC in Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 150 of 2023 pending before Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal, should be granted regular bail.

Court's answer

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances, nature of allegation and materials available against the petitioner, the Court was inclined to release him on regular bail.

Ratio / Principle

Release ordered on furnishing of bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal, in connection with Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 150 of 2023 (G.R. Case No. 698 of 2023; S.T. Case No. 08 of 2024).

Key takeaways

Condition (1): the petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date till conclusion of the trial unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the Trial Court.ratio¶14
Condition (2): the petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.ratio¶15
Condition (3): the petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with prosecution evidences or influencing prosecution witnesses.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.), B.A. No.1633 of 2024, Order No.07 dated 18.06.2024 — Regular bail granted to petitioner Imran Sheikh, accused in Radhanagar P.S. Case No. 150 of 2023 (G.R. Case No. 698 of 2023; S.T. Case No. 08 of 2024) under Section 364A/34 IPC pending before Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal, in a case arising from an alleged 14.10.2023 kidnapping of the complainant's son with a Rs. 20 Lakhs ransom demand. Bail ordered on a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of like amount each, subject to conditions: presence on every trial date, abstention from similar offences, and no tampering with prosecution evidences or influencing of witnesses; violation entails cancellation of bail and custody by the Trial Court.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.1633 of 2024

Imran Sheikh … Petitioner

Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

For the Petitioner : Mr. Om Prakash, Adv. For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Gaunjhu, Addl. P.P.

Order No.07/Dated- 18.06.2024

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Radhanagar P.S Case No. 150 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.698 of 2023 (S.T. Case no.08 of 2024) registered for the offence under Section 364A/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal.

As per FIR, it is alleged that on 14.10.2023, Kamal Sheikh reported to the Officer-In-Charge at Radhanagar Police Station that his 26 years’ old son went missing on 14.10.2023, after leaving for Barharwa. Kamal Sheikh alleged that his son was kidnapped by several accused persons and that the kidnappers used three mobile numbers to contact a villager, demanding a ransom of Rs.20 Lakhs and threatening to kill his son and hide the body, if the ransom was not paid or if the police were informed.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. Hence, petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial Custody since 19.10.2023 without any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. Petitioner undertakes to cooperate in the trial of the case by remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of bail.

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner. Hence, petitioner does not deserve bail.

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation against the petitioner coupled with the materials available against the petitioner. I am inclined to release the petitioner on regular bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal in connection with Radhanagar P.S Case No. 150 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. Case No.698 of 2023 (S.T. Case no.08 of 2024) subject to the conditions:-

(1) Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.

(2) Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.

(3) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses. In case of violation of the aforesaid conditions, the bail of the

petitioner shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned Trial Court itself.

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

Sachin