Allowed¶17

Ranjeet Kumar Mehta v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 May 2024B.A./2552/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail granted; Section 395 IPC; Domchanch P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024; CJM Koderma; robbery; Rs. 3,93,700 looted near Ambadaha Ghati on 03.01.2024; cash recoveries Rs. 14,000 (Rahul Kumar Pandey), Rs. 40,000 (Ranjeet Kumar Mehta), Rs. 13,100 (co-accused Roshan Kumar Yadav); no marks on looted notes; no T.I. Parade; bail bond Rs. 20,000 with two sureties; Justice Ambuj Nath; High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi; order dated 14.05.2024; B.A. Nos. 2329 and 2552 of 2024.

What did the court decide?

Both petitioners directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned C.J.M., Koderma, in connection with Domchanch P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024. ¶17

Ranjeet Kumar Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 2329 of 2024

¶2

Rahul Kumar Pandey … … Petitioner -Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party With B.A. No. 2552 of 2024 Ranjeet Kumar Mehta … … Petitioner -Versus - The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party

¶3

¶4

CORAM: - HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH

¶5

----For the Petitioners : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate : Mrs. Nivedita Kundu, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Mohua Palit, A.P.P. : Mrs. Kumari Rashmi, A.P.P.

¶6

¶7

03/14.05.2024

¶8

Both these Bail Applications arise out of the same police case. Accordingly, both these applications are disposed of by a common order.

¶9

Heard the parties

¶10

The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Domchanch P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024, for the offence registered under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned C.J.M., Koderma.

¶11

On 03.01.2024 at about 7:50 pm, the informant alongwith his associates were returning to their office at Domchanch after collecting money from their customers. When they reached near Ambadaha Ghati, 6 to 7 unknown persons intercepted them and looted Rs.3,93,700/- from them.

¶12

It was submitted that the petitioner Rahul Kumar Pandey was neither arrested at this spot nor he was put on T.I Parade. It was further submitted that Rs. 14,000/- was recovered from his possession which was his personal money.

¶13

As far as petitioner Ranjeet Kumar Mehta is concerned, he was neither named in the F.I.R. nor was he put on T.I. Parade. Rs. 40,000/- was recovered from his possession which was his personal money.

¶14

-2-

¶15

It appears that there was no marks on the notes which were looted from the informant to show that the money so recovered from the possession of the petitioners belonged to him.

¶16

It appears that Roshan Kumar Yadav from whom Rs.13,100/- was recovered has been granted bail by this Court earlier.

¶17

Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to release the petitioners, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, named above, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/(Rupees Twenty Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned C.J.M., Koderma in connection with Domchanch P.S. Case No. 02 of 2024.

¶18

(Ambuj Nath, J.)

¶19

Jay/Uploaded

Ranjeet Kumar Mehta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Kumar Mehta v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jotul Nath Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ijrail Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Barik Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dinesh Ram Alias Dinesh Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rahul Kumar Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Abhishekh Jha Alias Chhotu Paswan Alias Chhutu Paswan Vs the State of Jharkhand