High CourtsSingle Bench

Deepak Kumar Jha vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 14 December 2020 · Citation: (2020) 12 JH CK 0108

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 120B, 379, 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 156(3)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 9711 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 · 397 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned Senior Advocate appearing 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 Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are

ignored for the present.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Dhansar P.S. Case No.134 of 2019 registered under sections

406/420/467/468/471/379/120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code.

The learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has cheated the

informant and others of Rs.88,00,000/-. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false and drawing attention of this Court

to page no.129 of the brief, it is submitted that the petitioner first instituted a complaint vide complaint case no.3359 of 2019 which upon being

forwarded to police under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C., Dhanbad P.S. Case No.359 of 2019 was registered and as a counter blast the complainant after

fabricating a document purporting to be a bond executed by the petitioner, a copy of which has been kept at page no.47 of the brief, has foisted this

false case. It is next submitted that the petitioner has categorically stated that his signature is not appearing in the said page no.47 and that the same is

a forged document. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 24.08.2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the bail

application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be

admitted to bail.

The learned Addl. P.P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly,

the petitioner is directed to be released on bail 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 J.M. 1st Class, Dhanbad, in connection with Dhansar P.S. Case No.134 of 2019 with the condition that the

petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case.