The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6916 of 2013 ------- 1. Saryu Yadav @ Sarju Yadav 2. Banarshi Yadav .… Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioners : For the State : : M/s. Rajan Sahay : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Panki P.S. Case No. 43 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 717 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 414 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act. From the F.I.R. it appears that the petitioners were apprehended with a tractor loaded with illegally mined coal. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Saryu Yadav @ Sarju Yadav & Banarshi Yadav, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palamu, in connection with, Panki P.S. Case No. 43 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 717 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 6917 of 2013 ------- Eiliyash Seikh @ Eliyash Choudhary .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State :
Legal Reasoning
: M/s. Dilip Kr. Chakraverty : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 3/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 124 of 2007, S.T. No. 240 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 413, 414, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. From the F.I.R. it appears that the case relates to recovery of stolen iron scrap from the godown of the petitioner. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Eiliyash Seikh @ Eliyash Choudhary, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Bokaro, in connection with, Balidih P.S. Case No. 124 of 2007, S.T. No. 240 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5515 of 2013 ------- Sonu Kumar Singh .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Md. Shahid Anshari : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Ormanjhi P.S. Case No.98 of 2012, corresponding to G.R No.4000 of 2012, S.T. No. 854 of 2012, for the offence under Sections 395 / 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The case relates to road dacoity and soon after the occurrence the petitioner was apprehended after a chase and was also identified by the victims. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Sonu Kumar Singh, is hereby rejected. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5521 of 2013 ------- Sukhwa Lomga @ Sukuwa Lomga .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. K.P.Choudhary : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Goilkera P.S. Case No.16 of 2009, corresponding to G.R No.140 of 2009, S.T. No. 93 of 2012 / 123 of 2011, for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 353, 302, 120(B), 398, 427 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 27 of the Arms Act, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, Section 13 of the U.A.P. Act and Section 3 & 4 of the Explosive Substance Act. Three persons belonging to extremists group were apprehended by the police and while they were being taken away, there was a land mine explosion followed by encounter between the police party and the extremists, in which several police personnel had been killed and others were injured. The petitioner is named to be one of the extremists engaged in the encounter and in that view of the matter the bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected on merits by order dated 27.8.2012 in B.A. No. 4906 of 2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Sukhwa Lomga @ Sukuwa Lomga, is hereby rejected. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5513 of 2013 ------- 1. Dipu @ Dipak Kachhap 2. Prakash Kachhap .… Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioners : For the State : : M/s. Pawan Kr. Pathak : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Namkum P.S. Case No. 65 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1198 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 376/ 511/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. From the F.I.R. it appears that there was an attempt to commit rape upon the informant, but the rape could not be committed and she was saved. The petitioners managed to flee away, who have been named by the apprehended co-accused. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Dipu @ Dipak Kachhap & Prakash Kachhap, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Manish, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, or his successor, in connection with, Namkum P.S. Case No. 65 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1198 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5516 of 2013 ------- 1. Samnath Gope 2. Jagdish Gope 3. Somra Barla @ Kerketta .… Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioners : For the State : : M/s. Ritu Kumar : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Karra P.S. Case No. 28 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 235 of 2012, for the offence under Sections 147/ 148/ 149/ 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 / 4 of the Witchcraft Practices Act. From the F.I.R. it appears that there is allegation against nine named accused persons and two unknown persons to have committed the murder of the wife of the informant on the pretext that she was practising witchcraft. Though the petitioners are named in the F.I.R., but there is only omnibus allegation against them. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Samnath Gope, Jagdish Gope & Somra Barla @ Kerketta, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri R. Srivastava, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Khunti, or his successor, in connection with, Karra P.S. Case No. 28 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 235 of 2012. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5517 of 2013 ------- 1. Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh 2. Mandip Singh .… Petitioners -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioners : For the State : : M/s. Renu Bala : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioners have been made accused in connection with Manika P.S. Case No. 96 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 661 of 2012, S.T. No. 51 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 364 A, 511, 120B of the Indian Penal Code. There was an attempt to abduct the informant for ransom, but he was saved. The co-accused was apprehended and the petitioners have been named by the apprehended co-accused. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioners on bail. Accordingly, the petitioners, Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh & Mandip Singh, are directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Sessions Judge, Latehar, in connection with, Manika P.S. Case No. 96 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 661 of 2012, S.T. No. 51 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5526 of 2013 ------- Dip Narayan Das .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Purnendu Kr. Jha : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 30 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 307 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 406, 419, 420, 120(B), 468/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. From the F.I.R. it appears that the other co-accused persons had taken some money from the informant on the pretext of getting job and of getting some loan. It is alleged that on the date of occurrence the petitioner came to the informant and impersonated himself as a Bank Manager. He was apprehended and produced before the police. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Dip Narayan Das, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Dinesh Rai, learned S.D.J.M., Godda, or his successor, in connection with, Mahagama P.S. Case No. 30 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 307 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5528 of 2013 ------- Md. Lukman .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Ranjan Kumar Singh : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mahagama P.S. Case No. 56 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 535 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 504, 307, 379/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. There is allegation against the petitioner and the other co-accused to have assaulted and injured the informant and his father. The impugned order shows that there is land dispute between the parties and there is case and counter-case between the parties for the same occurrence. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Md. Lukman, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Godda, in connection with, Mahagama P.S. Case No. 56 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 535 of 2013 D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5529 of 2013 ------- Lal Mohmod @ Lal Mohammad Khan -Versus- .… Petitioner The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Nilesh Kumar : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Sikidiri P.S. Case No. 07 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 714 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 498A, 341, 323/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was instituted on the basis of the complaint petition which was sent for institution of the police case. There is allegation against the petitioner to have subjected his wife to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry and to have threatened to marry another girl. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Lal Mohmod @ Lal Mohammad Khan, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Rajesh Sinha, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Ranchi, or his successor, in connection with, Sikidiri P.S. Case No. 07 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 714 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5530 of 2013 ------- Banwari Bhuiyan .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Prabhat Kr. Sinha : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 3536 of 2012, S.T. No. 618 of 2012, for the offence under Sections 395, 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The case relates to dacoity and the case was instituted against unknown. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and has prayed for bail. Learned counsel for the State upon going through the case diary has submitted that the petitioner has been made accused only on the basis of the confessional statements. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Banwari Bhuiyan, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-VIII, Hazaribag, in connection with, Mandu (Kuju) P.S. Case No. 214 of 2012, corresponding to G.R. No. 3536 of 2012, S.T. No. 618 of 2012. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5484 of 2013 ------- Bhuneshwar Mahto @ Dablu Mahto .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Atanu Banerjee : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Gomia P.S. Case No. 19 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 120 of 2011, for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 379, 427, 435 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 10 / 13 of the U.A.P. Act and Section 17 of the C.L.A. From the F.I.R. it appears that one J.C.B. was burnt by the members of the extremists group and the driver has stated that the petitioner was one amongst the culprits. There is no overt act alleged by the driver against this petitioner. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Bhuneshwar Mahto @ Dablu Mahto, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri S. K. Dubey, learned Judicial Magistrate, Bermo at Tenughat, or his successor, in connection with, Gomia P.S. Case No. 19 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 120 of 2011. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5535 of 2013 ------- Surendra Sahu .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Pandey Neeraj Rai : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Tatisilway P.S. Case No. 32 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 2066 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 498-A of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/ 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. There is allegation against the petitioner to have subjected his wife to cruelty and torture for demand of dowry. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Surendra Sahu, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Sri Prakash Jha, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, or his successor, in connection with, Tatisilway P.S. Case No. 32 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 2066 of 2013 D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5537 of 2013 ------- Abid Ansari .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Asha Jha : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Balidih P.S. Case No. 09 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 83 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 395 / 412 of the Indian Penal Code. The case relates to dacoity in a factory and the case was instituted against unknown. The impugned order shows that the petitioner has been made accused in this case only on the basis of the confessional statement of the co-accused. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Abid Ansari, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Shri Neeraj Kumar, learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Bokaro, or his successor, in connection with, Balidih P.S. Case No. 09 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 83 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5550 of 2013 ------- Mahesh Yadav .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Rashmi Kumari (A.C.) : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Koderma (S.C./ S.T.) P.S. Case No. 04 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 123 of 2013, for the offence under Sections 323/ 341/ 504/ 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 / 4 of the S.C. / S.T. (POA) Act. There is allegation against the petitioner to have assaulted the informant and abused him in the name of his caste. In the facts of this case, I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, Mahesh Yadav, is directed to be released on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Koderma, in connection with, Koderma (S.C./ S.T.) P.S. Case No. 04 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 123 of 2013. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B.A No. 5538 of 2013 ------- Ranjit Sardar @ Petu Sardar .… Petitioner -Versus- The State of Jharkhand ..... Opposite Party ------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.C.MISHRA ------- For the Petitioner : For the State : : M/s. Tapas Roy : Mr. A.P.P. ------- 2/ 31.07.2013. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. The petitioner has been made accused in connection with Adityapur (R.I.T.) P.S. Case No. 169 of 2011, corresponding to G.R. No. 566 of 2011, for the offence under Sections 302/ 34/ 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The case relates to the murder of the father of the informant and the petitioner was seen fleeing away from the room where the deceased was found in an injured condition and subsequently he died. It also appears that from the possession of the petitioner, one fired cartridge and pistol had been recovered and the petitioner had confessed his guilt stating that with the same fired cartridge, the murder of the deceased was committed. The bail application of the petitioner was earlier rejected on merits by order dated 12.3.2012 in B.A. No. 1072 of 2012. Learned counsel for the petitioner has renewed the prayer for bail. In the facts of this case, I am not inclined to release the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner Ranjit Sardar @ Petu Sardar, is hereby rejected. D.S. (H.C.Mishra, J.)