Allowed¶12

Umesh Ganjhu v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC22 Aug 2024B.A./4945/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Jharkhand HC bail granted: Umesh Ganjhu, B.A. No. 4945 of 2024, Justice Subhash Chand, 22 Aug 2024; Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 (IPC 307/506/34/120B; Arms Act S.27) pending before CJM Chatra; FIR by injured informant Kamaldev Ganjhu names shooters Ishwari and Akhilesh Ganjhu, allegedly hired by Chalitar Ganjhu, the petitioner and Samir Miyan after an opium-raid tip-off; court found no evidence beyond the informant's suspicion of the petitioner's role in the hiring; bail allowed with bond of Rs. 25,000 and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024. ¶12

Umesh Ganjhu Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶12

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, Umesh Ganjhu, is entitled to be released on bail in connection with Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 (registered under Sections 307, 506, 34 and 120B IPC and Section 27 Arms Act), pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra. +1 more

¶8

Court's answer

On that basis the court allowed the bail application and directed release of the petitioner on furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024.

¶12

Ratio / Principle

Per the FIR, Ishwari Ganjhu and Akhilesh Ganjhu shot the informant and were allegedly hired by Chalitar Ganjhu, the petitioner and Samir Miyan, but the court found there is admittedly no evidence except the suspicion of the informant in regard to the hiring of the two shooters by the present petitioner.

¶11

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BAIL GRANTED — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi, B.A. No. 4945 of 2024 (Subhash Chand, J.; decided 22.08.2024): bail application of Umesh Ganjhu in Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024 (Ss. 307, 506, 34, 120B IPC; S. 27 Arms Act), pending before the CJM, Chatra, allowed. FIR lodged by the injured informant (Kamaldev Ganjhu) himself alleged that on 24.01.2024 at about 07:00 p.m. Ishwari Ganjhu and Akhilesh Ganjhu shot him, one bullet hitting his waist, and that they had been hired by Chalitar Ganjhu, the petitioner and Samir Miyan out of enmity traced to the informant's tip-off to the police, in whose raid opium was recovered from Chalitar Ganjhu's house. Holding: there was admittedly no evidence except the informant's suspicion regarding the petitioner's role in hiring the shooters; bail allowed on a bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A. No. 4945 of 2024

¶2

Umesh Ganjhu aged about 30 years, son of Sukan Ganjhu, resident of village-Harhad, P.O. and P.S.- Lawalong, District-Chatra.

¶3

….. ….. Petitioner

¶4

Versus The State of Jharkhand …. …. Opp. Party

¶5

-------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND -----For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhay Kumar Chaturvedy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P. --------

¶6

05/ 22^nd August, 2024

¶7

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

¶8

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the abovenamed petitioner with the prayer to release on bail in connection with Lawalong P.S. Case No. 05 of 2024, registered under Sections 307, 506, 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chatra.

¶9

The FIR of this case was lodged by the injured himself against the five named accused including the present petitioner wherein the allegations are made that on 24.01.2024, at about 07:00 p.m., Ishwari Ganjhu and Akhilesh Ganjhu both had shot him and one bullet hit on his waist. The real culprit for this shooting are Chalitar Ganjhu and his younger brother Umesh Ganjhu and Samir Miyan. Chalitar Ganjhu was involved in dealing with opium and in raid conducted by the police, opium was recovered from his house and it came to know that it was the informant Kamaldev Ganjhu who had informed the police for the same. On account of the very reason, he was having enmity and earlier also, he had criminally intimidated him. It is further alleged that it was Chalitar Ganjhu, Umesh Ganjhu and Samir Miyan who had hired two shooters Ishwari Ganjhu and Akhilesh Ganjhu.

¶10

¶11

As per the allegations made in the FIR by the victim himself, it was Ishwari Ganjhu and Akhilesh Ganjhu who had shot him and one bullet had hit on his waist. The allegation is that it was Chalitar Ganjhu, Umesh Ganjhu and Samir Miyan who had hired these two shooters on account of the enmity. Admittedly, there is no evidence except the suspicion of the informant in regard to the hiring of the two shooters by the present petitioner.

¶12

In view of the above, the bail application of the petitioner is hereby allowed. Let the petitioner be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned in the aforesaid case.

¶13

(Subhash Chand, J.)

¶14

Rashmi

¶15

Umesh Ganjhu v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Ganjhu 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

Jaura Karwa Vs the State of Jharkhand

Premkant Lohra Alias Prem Kant Lohra Alias Prem Kumar Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand

Arun Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pandu Munda Vs the State of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Pandey Vs the State of Jharkhand

Hare Krishna Swansi Vs the State Ofjharkhand