Md. Rafik Miyan Alias Rafik Miyan Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2024)

Md. Rafik Miyan Alias Rafik Miyan Vs the State of… — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: in the event of arrest/surrender within three weeks, release on bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti, in connection with Tapkara P.S. Case No. 05/2024, subject to the condition under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners, apprehending arrest in connection with Tapkara P.S. Case No. 05/2024 for offences punishable under Section 414/34 IPC, Section 11(1)(a)/11(1)(d) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 12(i)(ii) Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005, should be enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Court's answer

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, the Court was inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

Ratio / Principle

In the event of the petitioners' arrest/surrender within three weeks, they are to be released on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti, in connection with Tapkara P.S. Case No. 05/2024, subject to the condition laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, A.B.A. No. 4122 of 2024 (Rajesh Shankar, J., 23.07.2024): Petitioners apprehended arrest in Tapkara P.S. Case No. 05/2024 for offences under Section 414/34 IPC, Section 11(1)(a)/11(1)(d) Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 12(i)(ii) Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005. Their names figured in the F.I.R. through the alleged disclosure of apprehended co-accused Lawrence Bhengra; counsel submitted that apart from that disclosure no cogent material connected them, that they had no criminal antecedents, and that co-accused had already been granted anticipatory bail (order dated 18.07.2024 in A.B.A No. 4116 of 2024). Considering the materials on record, the Court enlarged the petitioners on anticipatory bail: upon arrest/surrender within three weeks, release on a bail bond of Rs.20,000/- each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti, subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4122 of 2024

Md. Rafik Miyan @ Rafik Miyan

Shakeel Ansari @ Shakil Ansari ... … Petitioners Versus

The State of Jharkhand ... … Opposite Party CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR

----- For the petitioners : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, A.P.P. -----

04/23.07.2024 The petitioners are apprehending their arrest for the offences punishable under Section 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 11(1)(a)/11(1)(d) of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Section 12(i)(ii) of Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act, 2005.

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 F.I.R. It has been alleged that four bovine animals were driven away with cruelty by three persons for slaughter purpose. Though the petitioners have been named in the F.I.R, however, their names were allegedly disclosed by the apprehended co-accused namely, Lawrence Bhengra. As per the said disclosure, the petitioners were also accompanying him, but they managed to flee away from the place of occurrence. Except the alleged disclosure made by the coaccused, the police has not collected any cogent material so as to connect them with the alleged offence. Co-accused namely, Sidique Ansari @ Md. Sidique @ Md. Siddik @ Sidhique Ansari @ Md. Sidhique and Ram Mahto have already been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 18.07.2024 passed in A.B.A No.

A.B.A. No. 4122 of 2024

4116 of 2024. The petitioners have no criminal antecedents as has been stated in paragraph no. 17 of the present application. They also undertake to co-operate in the ongoing investigation. Hence, they may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

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

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the materials available on record, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the petitioners above named, in the event of their arrest/surrender 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 Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Khunti in connection with Tapkara P.S. Case No. 05/2024, subject to the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

(Rajesh Shankar, J.)

Manish

A.B.A. No. 4122 of 2024