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
6 paragraphs · 324 wordsIn view of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, case has been taken up through Video Conferencing. Concerned lawyers have no objection with regard to the proceeding, which has been held through Video Conferencing today at 10:30 A.M. onwards. They have no complaint in respect to the audio and video clarity and quality.
Apprehending their arrest, petitioners have filed the instant application for grant of anticipatory bail in connection with G (F) Case No. 688 of 2016, for the offences under Sections 33/41/42 of Indian Forest Act.
Mr. Pradeep Kumar Prasad, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the informant nor there is any material which could show as to what specific offence the petitioners have committed. Learned counsel further argues that from perusal of offence report it would be evident that petitioners have neither present at the place of occurrence nor anybody has seen them cutting the stone at the place of occurrence. In the offence report, the informant has not named these petitioners for specific allegation of commission of such offence and further, nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioners. Learned counsel further argues that there is no likelihood of their absconding, if the petitioners are enlarged on anticipatory bail.
Mr. Pravir Chatterjee, learned APP vehemently opposes the contention of the petitioners.
In the facts and circumstances, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail.
Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender before the Court below within a period of four weeks from today, the petitioners named above shall will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) each, with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Hazaribagh, in connection with G (F) Case No. 688 of 2016, subject to fulfillment of the condition as laid down under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.