Allowed

Salim Khan Alias MD Salim v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC14 May 2024A.B.A./942/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to eight petitioners facing charges under multiple sections of IPC. They were directed to surrender within four weeks and furnished a bail bond with sureties and conditions for court appearance.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted; direction to surrender within four weeks on furnishing bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties.

Salim Khan Alias MD Salim Vs the State of Jharkhand — Cheating and Forgery | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

¶2

A.B.A. No. 942 of 2024

¶3

Salim Mian @ Md. Salim

¶4

Md. Karim Mian @ Md. Karim

¶5

Khalil Mian @ Md. Khalil

¶6

Md. Akhtar @ Akhtar Hussain

¶7

Md. Tasim

¶8

Md. Jiyaul @ Jiyaul Haque @ Md. Jiyaul Haque

¶9

Md. Fayum @ Md. Fayum Ansari

¶10

Md. Nishar @ Nishar Ansari ….. Petitioners

¶11

Versus

¶12

The State of Jharkhand

¶13

Samsuddin Ansari ….. Opp. Parties

¶14

---------

¶15

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶16

-------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Arvind Prajapati, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, A.P.P. ---------

¶17

Order No. 06/Dated: 14^th May, 2024

¶18

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶19

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Complaint (Protest) Case No. 1699 of 2022, instituted under Sections 323, 406, 420, 504, 506 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶20

As per FIR, the allegation is that on 12.02.2021 at around 12:30 P.M. at the Registry Office, Hazaribag the complainant and accused persons came for sale of joint property for consideration amount of Rs. 23,92,500/- in which each seller had to get equal share from the sale. It is further alleged that the buyer Krishna Devi handed over the amount to Taslim, Khalil, Ahmad Mian and Salim Mian, on demand of the amount by the complainant and other accused and Md. Taslim asked them to come to his house in the evening to receive the amount. Thereafter, the complainant along with other went to Salim’s house to procure the amount, but there they were subjected to assault and abuse and were refused to pay the amount.

¶21

P a g e 1 | 2

¶22

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that petitioners are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is further submitted that earlier FIR was lodged for this occurrence, in which after completion of investigation, final form was submitted showing this case to be mistake of facts. Thereafter, on the basis of protest-cum-complaint, cognizance has been taken against the petitioners for the offence under Sections 323, 406, 420, 504, 506 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code. It is further submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate in trial of the case and abide by all terms and conditions, as imposed by this Court, in the case of granting anticipatory bail to these petitioners. Hence, petitioners may be granted privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶23

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

¶24

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 petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Hazaribag in connection with Complaint (Protest) Case No. 1699 of 2022 with the condition that they will co-operate in the trial of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their 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.

¶25

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶26

Sunil/

¶27

P a g e 2 | 2

Salim Khan Alias MD Salim v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim Khan Alias MD Salim 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

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

Santosh Kumar Jaiswal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand