Santosh Kumar Jaiswal v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 May 2024A.B.A./515/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail — Jharkhand High Court — A.B.A. No. 515 of 2024 — Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023 — Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC — Section 81 Indian Registry Act — land purchase from co-sharer — parity with co-accused bail orders — bail bond Rs. 25,000 with two sureties — Section 438(2) CrPC conditions — Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J. — Ranchi.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender in court within four weeks; on arrest or surrender, to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, subject to conditions of cooperation with investigation and the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) CrPC. ¶¶10

Santosh Kumar Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶10

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023 (allegedly as purchaser of a portion of land sold by a co-sharer), should be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶¶4

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegation coupled with materials on record, the Court was inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail, directing the petitioner to surrender in court within four weeks.

¶¶10

Ratio / Principle

In the event of arrest or surrender, the petitioner is to be enlarged on bail on furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

¶¶10

Key takeaways

Bail is conditioned on cooperation with the investigation, appearance before the investigating officer as and when noticed, furnishing mobile number and Aadhaar card photocopy with an undertaking not to change the mobile number during the pendency of the case, and compliance with the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.ratio¶¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Anticipatory bail granted — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.), A.B.A. No. 515 of 2024, decided 14.05.2024. Petitioner Santosh Kumar Jaiswal apprehended arrest in Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023, instituted under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and Section 81 of the Indian Registry Act (title as printed), the allegation being that he purchased a portion of land sold by Jyoti Prabha Devi, a co-sharer; defence relied on an existing land dispute between the complainant and the vendor and parity with co-accused granted anticipatory bail by orders dated 04.03.2024–07.03.2024 in ABA Nos. 133, 352, 427 and 443 of 2024. Held: anticipatory bail granted; petitioner to surrender within four weeks and on arrest/surrender be enlarged on bail on a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two like sureties to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, subject to cooperation with investigation, appearance before the IO as noticed, furnishing mobile number and Aadhaar copy with undertaking not to change the number, and the conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 515 of 2024

¶2

Santosh Kumar Jaiswal …..Petitioner Versus
The State of Jharkhand …..Opp. Party ---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA --------
For the Petitioner : Miss. Manjulika Horo, Advocate. Mr. A.K. Sahani, Advocate.
For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, A.P.P. ---------
Order No. 04/Dated: 14^thMay, 2024

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶4

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023, instituted under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 81 of the Indian Registry Act, the petitioner has moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶5

As per FIR, the allegation is that petitioner is the purchaser of the portion of the land in question and the same was sold by Jyoti Prabha Devi, who is one of the co-sharer of the land.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all rather he has been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that from perusal of the allegations contained in the complaint petition, forming part of the First Information Report, it would be crystal clear that there is land dispute between the complainant and Jyoti Prabha Devi. It is further submitted that co-accused have been granted anticipatory bail vide order dated 07.03.2024 passed in ABA No. 427 of 2024, vide order dated 07.03.2024 passed in ABA No. 443 of 2024, vide order dated 06.03.2024 passed in ABA No. 352 of 2024 and vide order dated 04.03.2024 passed in ABA No. 133 of 2024. It is further submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and abide by all terms and conditions, as imposed by this Court, in the case of granting anticipatory

¶7

P a g e 1 | 2

¶8

bail to this petitioner. Hence, petitioner may be granted privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation coupled with materials on record, I am inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Sonahatu P.S. Case No. 22 of 2023 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶11

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶12

Sunil/

¶13

P a g e 2 | 2

Santosh Kumar Jaiswal v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Jaiswal 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

Mampi Das Vs the State of Jharkhand

Lalu Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shashi Shekhar Prasad Vs the State of Jharkhand and Anr.

Eqram Mansoori Vs the State of Jharkhand

Salim Khan Alias MD Salim Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand