Birendra Chouhan Alias Gusta Alias Virender Chouhan Allias Birendra Kumar Chouhan Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1295 of 2024

-----

Birendra Chouhan @ Gusta @ Virender Chouhan @ Birendra Kumar Chouhan aged about 41 years, son of Vishnu Chouhan @ Vishun Chouhan, resident of Pure Barora, P.O. Nawagarh, P.S. Barora, District Dhanbad, Jharkhand.

¶4

… … Appellant

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Jharkhand … … Respondent

¶7

¶8

CORAM:HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR

¶9

------For the Appellant : Md. Zaid Ahmed, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, A.P.P.

¶10

¶11

Order No. 02 / Dated 18^th October, 2024

¶12

1. The instant appeal under section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 has been directed against the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad in Bail Petition No.643 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in connection with Barora P.S. Case No.63 of 2022 registered for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 386, 307 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 25(1-B)(a), 27(1), 35 of the Arms Act and Section 3/4 of the Explosive Substance Act, has been rejected.

¶13

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that it is a case where the appellant has falsely been implicated.

¶14

3. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that as per the allegation the appellant and several accused persons had arrived with arms and ammunitions in order to demand extortion money from the informant and

¶15

1

¶16

ultimately when the locals assembled, the accused persons fled away.

¶17

4. He has further submitted that so far as the appellant is concerned, the allegations are general and omnibus in nature.

¶18

5. It has further been submitted that there has been no recovery of any incriminating material from the conscious possession of the appellant.

¶19

6. It has been submitted that though the allegation has been leveled against the accused persons of firing and throwing bombs at the informant, but the informant has not sustained any injury even the scratch in his body which itself falsifies the allegation levelled by the inoformant.

¶20

7. Learned counsel for the appellant has further submitted that the identically placed co-accused person, namely, Shankar Beldar @ Shankar Baldar has been directed to be released on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.05.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.289 of 2024.

¶21

8. Based on the aforesaid grounds, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned order may be interfered with.

¶22

9. While on the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. However, he has not disputed the fact that the identically

¶23

2

¶24

placed co-accused person, namely, Shankar Beldar @ Shankar Baldar has been directed to be released on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.05.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.289 of 2024. 10. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties and gone across the impugned order rejecting the prayer for regular bail of the appellant.

¶25

11. From the material available on record, it is evident that no recovery has been made from the possession of the appellant and further the allegations are general and omnibus in nature so far as the present appellant is concerned.

¶26

12. It further appears that one identically placed accused person, namely, Shankar Beldar @ Shankar Baldar has already been directed to be released on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.05.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.289 of 2024.

¶27

13. Considering the fact that the identically placed coaccused person has already been directed to be released on bail and the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 27.07.2024, we are of the view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with.

¶28

14. Accordingly, the order dated 12.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Dhanbad in Bail Petition No.643 of 2024, is, hereby, quashed and set aside so far as it relates to present appellant.

¶29

15. In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

¶30

3

¶31

Birendra/

¶32

16. In consequence thereof, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1^st Class, Dhanbad in connection with Barora P.S. Case No.63 of 2022, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered.

¶33

17. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of.

¶34

(Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.)

¶35

(Navneet Kumar, J.)

¶36

4

Birendra Chouhan Alias Gusta Alias Virender Chouhan Allias Birendra Kumar Chouhan v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Birendra Chouhan Alias Gusta Alias Virender Chouhan Allias Birendra Kumar Chouhan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mrityunjay Kumar Singh Alias Mrityunjay Kumar Alias Sonu Singh Vs Union of India through the Superintendent of Police National Investigation Agency

Nirbhik Hembrom Alias Luxman Da Alias Luxman Alias Raman Hembrom Vs the State of Jharkhand

Siraj Alias Sirajuddin Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mahatam Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Noor Mohammad Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Jainath Kherwar Vs the State of Jharkhand