High CourtsSingle Bench

Sajid Ali vs State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 1 February 2021 · Citation: (2021) 02 JH CK 0015

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 34, 188, 269, 290, 414 · Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Section 22(B) · Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 — Section 18(C), 27(b)(ii) Disaster Management Act, 2005 — Section 51 · Jharkhand State Epidemic Disease Act, 2020 — Section 2, 3, 4
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Bail Application No. 12170 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

17 paragraphs · 376 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.

The petitioner has moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Korrah P.S. Case No.57 of 2020 registered under sections 414/188/269/290/34

of the Indian Penal Code, under section 22(B) of the N.D.P.S. Act, under section 18(C)/27(b)(ii) of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, under section 51 of the

Disaster Management Act and under section 2/3/4 of the Jharkhand State Epidemic Disease Act, 2020.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that police seized one vehicle transporting Wincirex cough

syrup and the driver disclosed the name of the petitioner and other co-accused. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all

false and nothing has been recovered from the possession of the petitioner. It is then submitted that the petitioner has been implicated in this case only

on the basis of confessional statement of the co-accused persons. It is next submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.11.2020 as has

been mentioned in paragraph no. 15 of the bail application. It is then submitted that the co-accused person has already been admitted to bail by this

Court vide order dated 27.01.2021, passed in B.A. No. 11899 of 2020. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the trial of

the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be admitted to bail.

The learned Spl. P.P. opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to

enlarge the above named petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released 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 Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh, in connection with Korrah

P.S. Case No.57 of 2020 with the condition that he will cooperate with the trial of the case.