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 · 265 wordsDeepak Roshan, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The instant bail application has been preferred by the petitioner for grant of regular bail for the offences registered under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307, 302, 504, and 506 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the bail application of the petitioner has earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 08.11.2023.
She further submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case and he is having no criminal antecedent and for no offence, he is languishing in jail custody since 10.04.2023. She lastly submits that the similarly situated co-accused has been granted bail by this Court in B.A. No. 4386 of 2024, as such he may be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.P.P. opposed the prayer for bail.
Having regard to the facts of the case and looking to the allegation made against this petitioner coupled with the fact that the co-accused has been granted bail by this Court, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten Thousand Only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned D.A.S.J-III, Khunti, in connection with Torpa, P.S. Case No. 31 of 2023 (S.T. No. 212 of 2023), with a condition that the petitioner will appear on each and every date before the trial Court during trial, failing which learned trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner.