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
7 paragraphs · 259 wordsSanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.
The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with C.P. Case No.599 of 2020, registered for the alleged offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 404, 323, 341, 120(B)/34 of the Indian Penal Code, pending in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a witness of an agreement of transaction of land. He submits that an agreement was made between the complainant and one Sidheshwar Tiwary, who has been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.49 of 2024.
Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer on the ground that the allegations are there.
Considering that the petitioner is only a witness of the agreement and co-accused has been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.49 of 2024 and in the attending facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the above-named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned Court within three weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrender, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bokaro in connection with C.P. Case No.599 of 2020, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.