High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajendra Choudhary vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 16 September 2020 · Citation: (2020) 09 JH CK 0136

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 379 · Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438(2)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
A.B.A. No. 3903 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

6 paragraphs · 434 words

Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

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

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No.181 of 2019 registered under sections 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code, under section 54 of JMMC Rules, under section 21(4) JMMDR, Rules, 1957 and under section 9(i)/9(ii)/13(7) of the JMD, Rules 2007.

The Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner is the owner of the tractor bearing registration no. JH03J 9802 which was seized by police for transporting illegally excavated sand. It is further submitted that the allegation against the petitioner are all false and he has no knowledge about his vehicle being involved in any illegal activity. It is next submitted that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 14 of the anticipatory bail application. It is then submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to furnish sufficient security including cash security and undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, he shall be released on bail on depositing cash security of Rs.5,000/- and 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 S.D.J.M., Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Chainpur P.S. Case No.181 of 2019 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the investigation of the case and appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will furnish his mobile number and a copy of his Aadhar Card in the court below with the undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.