Dismissed¶¶16

Nadeem Alias Nadim v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 Nov 2024B.A./4458/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi; B.A No. 4458 of 2024; bail rejected on criminal antecedents; accused in seven cases; Ss. 454/380 IPC theft; Doranda P.S. Case No. 357 of 2023; G.R. No. 525 of 2024; Judicial Magistrate Ranchi; getaway car WB-06E-6785; recovery of stolen jewellery; trial to be concluded preferably within six months; liberty to renew bail prayer; Justice Ambuj Nath; order dated 14.11.2024.

What did the court decide?

Bail refused: considering the criminal antecedents of the petitioners (who, per the A.P.P., are accused in as many as seven cases), the court is not inclined to release them on bail, and their prayer for bail stands rejected at this stage. ¶¶16

Nadeem Alias Nadim Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

B.A No. 4458 of 2024

¶3

Nadeem @ Nadim, aged about 49 years, son of Yusuf @ Yunus Quresi, Resident of Village 46/1, Habib Compound, near Heena Studio, Jassipura, P.S. Ghantaghar, Kotwali, P.O Gaziabad, P.S. Ghantaghar, District Gaziabad (Uttar Pradesh)

¶4

Tahur @ Tahir, aged about 25 years, son of Iqbal, Resident of House No. 215, Iqbal Colony, P.S. Tila More, P.O and District Gaziabad, Uttar Pradesh

¶5

----Petitioners

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand ----Opp. Party

¶8

¶9

CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath

¶10

¶11

For the Petitioners: Mr. Kumar Amit, Advocate For the O.P-State: Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.

¶12

06 / 14.11.2024 Heard the parties.

¶13

Petitioners have been made accused in connection with Doranda P.S. Case No. 357 of 2023 corresponding to G.R. No. 525 of 2024 for the offences registered under sections 454/380 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of Sri Acchat Srivastava, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶14

On 29.11.2023 at about 2.50 p.m. theft was committed in the house of the Informant. The Informant saw the thieves while decamping away with the stolen articles on a car bearing registration no. WB-06E-6785. Later on, petitioner was apprehended while travelling on the said vehicle. Stolen jewelleries were recovered from the vehicle on which the petitioner was travelling.

¶15

Learned A.P.P has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the petitioners are accused in as many as seven cases.

¶16

Considering the criminal antecedent of the petitioners, I am not inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for bail stands rejected, at this stage.

¶17

Learned Trial Court shall expedite the trial and preferably conclude the same within a period of six months from the next date fixed for recording of the evidence. If the trial is not concluded within the aforesaid period, petitioners, if so advised, may renew their prayer for bail.

¶18

(Ambuj Nath, J)

¶19

Ranjeet/ Uploaded

Nadeem Alias Nadim v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nadeem Alias Nadim v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ghasiya Bodra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dusab Boipai Vs the State of Jharkhand

Kaila Ganjhu Alias Hesal Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand

Chandan Verma Alias Chandan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suresh Prasad Nayak Vs the State of Jharkhand

Krishna Kumar Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand