Allowed

MD Mokkaram Alias Mokkaram Mohamad v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC5 Jan 2024A.B.A./5357/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand allowed an anticipatory bail application filed by a petitioner apprehending arrest in a chit fund misappropriation case. The court noted the investigation was concluded and the charge sheet submitted, leading to the grant of bail with specific conditions and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed; release on bail for Rs.1 Lakh with two sureties if arrested/surrendered within two weeks.

MD Mokkaram Alias Mokkaram Mohamad Vs the State of… — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A. B. A. No. 5357 of 2018

¶3

¶4

Md. Mokkaram @ Md. Mukram @ Mokkaram Mohamad @ M.M. Khan

¶5

… …. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Jharkhand 2. U.O.I. through CBI … …. Opp. Parties

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶9

----For the Petitioner : M/s Rajkumar Rajesh, Niranjan Kumar, Advocates For the CBI : M/s Anil Kumar, Addl.S.G.I. Nitish Parth Sarthi & Chandana Kumari, AC to Addl.S.G.I.

¶10

Oral Order

¶11

11 / Dated : 05.01.2024

¶12

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner named above has moved this Court for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with Pakur (T) P.S. Case No. 178 of 2015 (G.R. No. 444 of 2015), pending in the Court of learned CJM, Pakur.

¶13

Heard the parties.

¶14

As per the prosecution case, in compliance to the order dated 11.05.2015 passed in W.P. (PIL) No. 1635 of 2014 and subsequent order dated 21.04.2017 passed in W.P. (PIL) No. 642 of 2016, investigation was taken over by the CBI against the chit fund companies. The petitioner was the Director of one such Company namely M/s Shunshine Global Agro Limited against which Pakur (T) P.S. Case No. 178 of 2015 was registered and after investigation was taken over by the CBI, R.C. Case No. 31(S)/2017 EOW-R was registered. The petitioner is named in the FIR along with four others and the main allegation is that this Company raised deposit from the public to the tune of Rs.2,47,47,673/- from the District of Pakur, Godda, Deoghar etc. through their local agents and branch in-charge. The amount so raised was deposited in the account of M/s Shunshine Global Agro Limited. This petitioner was one of the signatories of the said Bank account and the amount of the Company to the tune of Rs.54,63,500/- was transferred to his personal account and Rs.88,08,000/- was transferred to the personal account of his wife Rajia Begam.

¶15

It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has fully co-operated in the investigation and charge sheet has already been submitted in this case and there is no further requirement of custodial interrogation. Furthermore, the matter has been taken by SEBI which has registered case bearing Case No. 28/2017 and CC No. 09/2018 before the court of District & Sessions Judge, PHC, New Delhi. The details of the assets were submitted by the petitioner before SEBI and in the case

¶16

instituted by SEBI, the petitioner has already been enlarged on bail.

¶17

Learned ASGI appearing for the CBI has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the matter involves the economic offence and the petitioner was the Director of the Company which raised investment from public and the same has been misappropriated and part of the amount has been credited in his personal bank account.

¶18

Having considered the submissions advanced on behalf of both sides and considering the fact that the investigation has been concluded and charge sheet has been submitted, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner named above shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Court below, subject to conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. and further subject to condition that one of the bailers will be Income Tax Payee.

¶19

(Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶20

AKT Uploaded

MD Mokkaram Alias Mokkaram Mohamad v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

MD Mokkaram Alias Mokkaram Mohamad 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

Keshav Kumar Sinha Vs the State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Chandan Bhar Vs the Union of India through the Secretary Department of Higher Education Ministry of H R D

Shishir Gupta Vs the Union of India through the Secretary Department of Higher Education Ministry of H R D

Ahli Devi Vs State of Jharkhand

Ruda Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand

Leny Smart Alias Leonard Smart Alias L Smart Vs the State of Jharkhand