Allowed

Jai Tarkeshwar Ganjhu Alias Tarkeshwar Ganju v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC4 Jul 2024B.A./1724/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner implicated in a firing case on the basis of a co-accused's confessional statement sought regular bail. Court granted bail with conditions including attendance at trial and no tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to be released on bail on Rs. 20,000 bail bond with two like sureties to CJM, Chatra, subject to conditions.

Jai Tarkeshwar Ganjhu Alias Tarkeshwar Ganju Vs the State… — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A. No. 1724 of 2024

¶3

Jai Tarkeshwar Ganjhu @ Tarkeshwar Ganju @ Jay Tarkeshwar Ganjhu …… Petitioner

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand ……Opposite party

¶6

----------

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶8

-----

¶9

For the Petitioners : Mr. Apurva Shrestha, Advocate Ms. Anshu Kumari, Advocate For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar Shukla, A.P.P.

¶10

Order No.05/ Dated:04.07.2024

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 15 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 2003 of 2022, registered for the offence under Section 324, 326, 307, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code Section 27 of Arms Act and Section 17(i)(ii) of C.L.A. Act, pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra.

¶13

As per FIR, allegation is that on 02.02.2021 at about 09:15 a.m. informant was sitting in the Awadhpur Budhiyabagi. Two youth on one white colour Apache motorcycle came and fired 5-6 round on him from 9 mm pistol. On alarm, driver and other persons ran. Local persons scuffled with miscreants and Manoj Choudhary also sustained bullet injury. Thereafter, informant and Manoj Choudhary were brought to Tandwa Hospital from there they were admitted in Medical Hospital where treatment is going on.

¶14

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. Petitioner is not named in the FIR rather he has been falsely implicated in this case on the basis of confessional statement of the Co-accused, Chandrashekhar Thakur. It is submitted that other Co-accused, namely,

¶15

Sushil Tirki in B.A. No. 3170 of 2022 vide order dated 19.04.2022 and Birendra Ganjhu in B.A. No. 15521 of 2021 vide order dated 31.01.2022 have been granted regular bail by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that other Co-accused, namely, Sonu Ganjhu @ Sonu Kumar Bhokta in B.A. No.6004 of 2022 vide order dated 21.06.2022 has been granted regular bail by this Court. No recovery has been made from the conscious possession of the petitioner and no TIP has been conducted. The petitioner is languishing in Judicial custody since 03.02.2022 without any rhymes and reasons. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate 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 enlarged on bail.

¶16

Learned A.P.P appearing on behalf of State has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that there are sufficient materials against the petitioner showing his involvement in the present case, hence he does not deserve bail.

¶17

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of allegation coupled with materials available against petitioner, I am inclined to release the petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/-(Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 15 of 2021 corresponding to G.R. No. 2003 of 2022 subject to the conditions:-

¶18

(1) Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every

¶19

date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the learned trial court.

¶20

(2) Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence

¶21

till the conclusion of the trial.

¶22

(3) Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the

¶23

prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses. In case of violation of the aforesaid condition the bail of the petitioner shall be cancelled and shall be taken into custody by the learned trial court itself.

¶24

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶25

R.K/

Jai Tarkeshwar Ganjhu Alias Tarkeshwar Ganju v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jai Tarkeshwar Ganjhu Alias Tarkeshwar Ganju 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

Vikesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ganesh Prasad Alias Ganesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Jawed Akhtar Alias MD Javed Akhtar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Tripathi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dev Prakash Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Chik Badaik Alias Mukesh Chik Baraik Vs the State of Jharkhand