Irfan Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

This is the second journey of the petitioner for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail as earlier the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail was rejected vide order dated 22.02.2024 in A.B.A. No.10636 of 2022, by a coordinate Bench.

¶12

Apprehending his arrest in connection with Angara P.S. Case No.35 of 2021 instituted under Sections 406, 420, 504, 506 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner was the witness in 2 sale deeds executed by co-accused Abdul Rajak, Kuddus Ansari and Md. Hafij Ansari in favor of two different persons; in respect of the same land. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that fresh ground is that the co-accused persons who executed the sale deeds to sell the land to two different persons, have been given the privileges of anticipatory bail by another co-ordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 12.04.2024 in A.B.A. No.6377 of 2023 upon the consideration, that they are desiring to return the consideration amount which was received by them with interest. It is next submitted that there is no allegation of any impersonation of the executors of the sale deed and the allegations against the petitioner stands in a lesser footing than the co-

¶14

accused persons; who themselves have executed the sale deeds, because the petitioner has only identified the executants of the sale deeds concerned and there is no allegation of any impersonation of any executants. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the investigation of the case and to furnish sufficient security including cash security. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned Spl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner.

¶16

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court below within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.F.C., Ranchi in connection with Angara P.S. Case No.35 of 2021 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 further conditions as laid down under Section 482 (2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

¶17

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶18

Abhiraj/

Irfan Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Irfan Ansari 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

Amit Kumar Ram Vs the State of Jharkhand

Santosh Oraon Vs the State of Jharkhand

Suraj Kumar Mahto Vs the State of Jharkhand

Narayan Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Deepanshu Kumar Sharma Alias Dipanshu Sharma Alias Batasha Alias Dipanshu Kumar Sharma Vs the State of Jharkhand

Keshav Kumar Mahato Vs the State of Jharkhand