High CourtsSingle Bench

Basudeo Nayak vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 3 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 JH CK 0157

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 272, 273, 278, 290, 414, 420 · Central Excise Act, 1944 — Section 47(a) · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 5465 Of 2020
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

20 paragraphs · 446 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the

stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Gorhar P.S. Case No.08 of

2020 registered under sections 272/273/278/290/ 414/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 47(a) of the Excise Act.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that huge quantity of India made foreign liquor was

recovered from a truck and the driver of the truck could not produce any valid documents for the same and it is alleged that the petitioner was

escorting the truck from the place where the liquor was loaded. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are all false and the

petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no.10 of the anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the

petitioner has no concern either with the seized vehicle or with the liquor. It is next submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish

sufficient security including cash security and undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be

given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner

be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he

shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.1,00,000/- and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate -1st Class, Hazaribagh, in connection with Gorhar P.S. Case

No.08 of 2020 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and

when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change

his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.