Allowed

Manilal Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Jul 2024A.B.A./2766/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted anticipatory bail to six petitioners facing charges under Sections 323, 325, 427, 379, 354, 504, and 506 IPC. The court found the case to be a counter-blast to an FIR lodged by one of the petitioners and noted the lack of independent witnesses. Petitioners were directed to surrender within three weeks to obtain bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within three weeks and furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties.

Manilal Pandit Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 2766 of 2024

¶3

---

¶4

Manilal Pandit

¶5

Gunadhar Pandit

¶6

Rupa Devi

¶7

Rita Devi

¶8

Malo Devi

¶9

Gopal Pandit … … Petitioners

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Jharkhand …. … Opposite Party

¶12

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR For the Petitioners : Mr. Gautam Kumar, Advocate For the State : Ms. Amrita Kumari, A.P.P.

¶13

Order No. 05 Dated: 15.07.2024

¶14

The petitioners apprehending their arrest for the offences punishable under Sections 323/325/427/379/354/504/506 of the Indian Penal Code, have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail.

¶15

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case and have not committed any offence as alleged in the complaint leading to lodging of the F.I.R. under Section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that prior to lodging of the said complaint, the petitioner no. 6 had lodged an F.I.R. being Ranga P.S. Case No. 108 of 2023 on 26.10.2023 against the complainant/informant, her husband and son for an occurrence which had taken place on 20.10.2023. The present case is counter blast of the said F.I.R. lodged by the petitioner no. 6. Otherwise also, there is an allegation that the petitioners assaulted the informant and molested her. There is no independent witness to corroborate the said allegation made by the informant. The petitioners undertake to cooperate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶16

3. Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioners’ prayer for anticipatory bail.

¶17

¶18

Ritesh/

¶19

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on consideration of the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

¶20

5. Accordingly, the petitioners, above named, in the event of their arrest or surrender before the court below within three weeks from today, shall 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 11 of 2024, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

¶21

Manilal Pandit v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manilal Pandit 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

Samsool Ansari Alias Chhotu Mian Vs State of Jharkhand

Sudarshan Mandal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nando Dangi Alias Nando Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suryadeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Bhagat Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ankit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand