High CourtsSingle Bench

Julfan Ansari vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 25 November 2020 · Citation: (2020) 11 JH CK 0079

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 302, 307, 325, 341 · Arms Act, 1959 — Section 27
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No.8813 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

18 paragraphs · 352 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown is over.

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

present.

The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Jagarnathpur (Pundag O.P.) P.S. Case No.412 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. No.676 of

2020 registered under Sections 341/325/307/302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of Arms Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that when the informant and his cousin were returning after

closing their jewelry shop they were accosted and fired upon and the cousin of the informant sustained bullet injuries and subsequently he died during

course of his treatment. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in

this case on account of his confessional statement rendered in another case and he has been implicated only on the basis of suspicion. It is then

submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. It is further submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since

11.12.2019. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused, has already been released on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated

21.09.2020 passed in B.A. No.6272 of 2020 and the case of the petitioner stands on similar footing. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be

released on bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail.

Considering the facts of this case, the above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur

(Pundag O.P.) P.S. Case No.412 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. No.676 of 2020 with the condition that he will co- operate with the trial of the case.