Md. Bisharat Shekh @ Bisharat Shekh vs State of Jharkhand

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 Radhanagar P.S. Case No.467 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. No.2208 of 2019 registered

under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 326 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner attempted to murder the husband of the

informant. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is next submitted that the petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. yet he has

been implicated in this case only on the basis of subsequent statement of injured persons recorded by police. It is further submitted that the named

accused persons have been given the privileges of anticipatory bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.02.2021 passed in A.B.A.

No.7583 of 2020. It is also submitted that the petitioner undertakes that he will not disturb or annoy the informant in any manner during the pendency

of the trial. It is then submitted that the petitioner undertakes to co-operate with the trial of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner has been

in custody since 11.12.2020 which is evident from para-1 of the instant bail application. 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 J.M.-1st

Class, Rajmahal in connection with Radhanagar P.S. Case No.467 of 2019 corresponding to G.R. No.2208 of 2019 with the condition that he will co-

operate with the trial of the case and he will not disturb or annoy the informant in any manner during the pendency of the trial.