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 · 182 wordsRajesh Kumar, J
Heard the parties.
The applicant(s), who is an accused for the offence under Sections 408, 420/34 IPC, prays for anticipatory bail expressing apprehension of arrest in connection with Argora P.S. Case No.191 of 2023, pending in the court of J.M.-XII, Ranchi.
Innocence has been claimed and undertaking has been given to co-operate with the Investigating Agency/ Trial. It has been submitted that this applicant is a staff of liquor shop and he has no concern with the deposite of amount. On the above basis, prayer for anticipatory bail has been made.
On the other hand, learned A.P.P. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant (s) and it has been submitted that this applicant along with other staffs have defalcated the govt. money and anticipatory bail application of some of the co-accused has already been rejected by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Considering the above facts, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the applicant(s).
Accordingly, prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant(s) is, hereby, rejected.