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 · 355 wordsJaya Roy, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.
The Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with the case registered under Sections 413, 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act.
Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that there is No. specific allegation against the Petitioner. It has only come in the F.I.R. that the some villagers have said that the present Petitioner is doing business of these stolen coal and they used to purchase coal from him. It is also submitted that the other co-accused, namely, Hemnarayan Mahto, Pradeep Mahto, Jairam Mahto & Subodh Thakur have already been granted anticipatory by other Bench of this Court.
Learned Counsel for the State has submitted that the prayer for anticipatory bail of few other co-accused have already been rejected by this Court.
Considering the facts that there is No. specific allegation against the Petitioner except the statement of the villagers, who are not named in the F.I.R., I direct the Petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 5,000/- (Five thousand) as a condition for granting of anticipatory bail and surrender in the court below within a period of one month from the date of this order i.e. 18.08.2011 and after deposit of the aforesaid amount and his surrenders within the said period, the trial court is directed to release him on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. Ten thousand) with two sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of A.C.J.M, Bermo at Tenughat in connection with Nawadih P.S. Case No. 66 of 2009 corresponding to G.R. No. 653 of 2009, subject to the condition that one of the bailors will be his close relative and another will be of local resident having immovable property within the jurisdiction of the trial court and also subject to the condition laid down u/s 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure
However, the trial court will not be prejudiced in trial for deposit of the aforesaid amount by the Petitioner it is only condition for granting of anticipatory bail.
