Mukesh Kumar Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Mukesh Kumar Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petitioner enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila, subject to conditions of cooperation in the trial and presence on every trial date, failing which cancellation of bail may be ordered by the court below.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, an accused under Section 379 IPC in Musabani P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 (G.R. Case No. 45 of 2024), should be enlarged on bail. +1 more

Court's answer

In view of the persuasive submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the court found it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioner was directed to be released 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 Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila, in connection with Musabani P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 / G.R. Case No. 45 of 2024.

Key takeaways

The bail is conditional: the petitioner must cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the court below and remain present on every and each date of the criminal trial, failing which the learned court below shall pass appropriate orders for cancellation of bail.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Mukesh Kumar Mahato, accused under Section 379 IPC in Musabani P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 (G.R. Case No. 45 of 2024) pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila, allegedly involved with co-accused in theft of copper cable wire worth Rs. 1,50,000/- though not named in the F.I.R.; in custody since 25.01.2024 with charge-sheet submitted; remanded into the case from Musabani P.S. Case No. 5 of 2024 (Section 395 IPC). The A.P.P. opposed bail citing the petitioner's alleged habitual offending and recovery of stolen articles from the co-accused's house. The High Court (Navneet Kumar, J.) held it just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail on a bail bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, subject to conditions that he cooperate in the trial and remain present on every date thereof, failing which the court below may cancel bail.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No. 6089 of 2024

Mukesh Kumar Mahato @ Mukesh Kr. Mahato, aged about 24 years, son of Umesh Chandra Mahato, Resident of Village-Kumardih, P.O. & P.S.- Kandra, District-Saraikela-Kharsawan (Jharkhand )

--- --- Petitioner

Versus

The State of Jharkhand --- --- Opposite Party

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

For the Petitioner : Mr. Abhilash Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mrs. Ruby Pandey, A.P.P.

03/05.08.2024 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. representing the State.

Petitioner is an accused in connection with Musabani P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 45 of 2024 for the offence registered under Section 379 of the IPC, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila.

It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the allegation against him is that he along with co-accused persons have stolen copper cable wire worth Rs. 1,50,000/-, although petitioner has not been named in the F.I.R. Further, it is submitted that petitioner is in custody since 25.01.2024 and charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and therefore, possibility of tempering with the evidence is very remote. Further, it has been submitted that petitioner has been remanded in this case from another case being Musabani P.S. Case No. 5 of 2024, which was instituted under Section 395 of the IPC.

On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the contentions raised by the petitioner and submitted that petitioner is a habitual offender of committing theft and therefore, he has been remanded in this case from Musabani P.S. Case No. 5 of 2024. It has also been submitted that at the instance of this petitioner along with coaccused, stolen articles have been recovered from the house of the co-accused and not from the house of the petitioner. Therefore,

petitioner does not deserve to be enlarged on bail.

Having heard the parties, perused the record of the case.

In view of the persuasive submission advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is found just and proper to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

Accordingly, the petitioner named above is directed to be released on bail on furnishing of bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghatsila in connection with Musabani P.S. Case No. 04 of 2024 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 45 of 2024, subject to the condition that petitioner will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the court below and he will remain present on every and each date of the criminal trial, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned court below for cancellation of bail.

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

A.Mohanty

2