The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5011 of 2023 1. Jawahar Lal Saha @ Jawahar Lal Sah 2. Manoj Kumar Saha 3. Vishwajit Saha The State of Jharkhand Versus --------- ….. Petitioners ….. Opp. Party
Legal Reasoning
terms and conditions imposed by this Court in the matter of granting anticipatory bail. Hence, petitioner nos. 2 & 3 may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State assisted by learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 and has submitted that there is direct and specific allegation of serious offence against the petitioners. On 12.08.2022, an agreement was executed by the informant only to purchase the crusher plant of the petitioners for value of Rs. 67 lakhs and at the time of transfer of the crusher plant, Rs. 01 crore and more amount is to be paid to the petitioners. After agreement, the informant found that the main documents regarding crusher plant like CTO, GST etc. were expired. Thereafter, on demand of informant, father of the petitioner undertakes to return Rs. 67 lakhs already received along with interest within one month time, but fail to repay the money by selling the mine to any other person. Petitioners was asked to raise -3- amount by selling mines and vehicles and when the informant was taking out vehicles and some articles for repairing from the aforesaid crusher plant, then petitioners stopped the vehicle took out 16 nos. of motors in Hywa and fled away. Hence, petitioner nos. 2 & 3 does not deserve the privilege of anticipatory bail. From perusal of record and dispute between the parties as discussed above appearing in respective contentions of both the parties, it appears that there was sell transaction between the informant and petitioners for winding up crusher plant. There was some dispute and it was resolved through agreement that informant shall be at liberty to sell out the vehicles and other machines of the said Plant and realize his money. There is simple allegation of theft of 16 motors against the petitioners, due to said dispute. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioner nos. 2 & 3 coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner nos. 2 & 3. Accordingly, the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty Five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajmahal in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 24 of 2023 with the condition that they will cooperate in investigation and shall furnish their mobile numbers and photocopy of the Aadhar Cards with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sunil/ (Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
Arguments
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA For the Petitioners For the State For the Informant -------- : Mr. Gautam Kumar Singh, Advocate. : Mr. Abhay Kumar Tiwari, A.P.P. : Mrs. Niharika Roy, Advocate. Mr. Rohan Mazumdar, Advocate. --------- Order No. 05/Dated: 12th March, 2024 Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that during pendency of this anticipatory bail application, petitioner no. 1 namely, Jawahar Lal Saha @ Jawahar Lal Sah has died, as such, the anticipatory bail application on behalf of petitioner no. 1 has become infructuous. Considering the same, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner no. 1 namely, Jawahar Lal Saha @ Jawahar Lal Sah is dismissed as infructuous. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Apprehending their arrest in connection with Ranga P.S. Case No. 24 of 2023 instituted under Sections 406, 379, 420, 427, 34 of the I.P.C., the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 have moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioner nos. 2 & 3 are innocent and have committed no offence at all rather they have been falsely implicated in this case. It is submitted that earlier a Complaint Case No. 143/2023 was filed by the petitioner no. 1, which was sent to the concerned Police Station under Section 156 (3) of the Cr.P.C. for institution of FIR, which was registered as Ranga P.S. Case No. 29 of 2023, however, the police without taking any action on FIR lodged by the petitioner no. 1 against informant’s son has proceeded to register the case at the instance of the informant against the petitioners. None of the copies of enclosures to the FIR -2- were supplied to the petitioners, inspite of the fact that they have applied for the same. There is allegation of transfer of Rs. 20 lakhs on 16.08.2022 in the account of present petitioners, but thereafter, regarding payment of Rs. 47 lakhs, there is no direct evidence in any of the enclosure to the FIR and copy of agreement dated 12.08.2022 is also manufactured one through Notary Public at Sahibganj, wherein forged signature of deceased father of the petitioners was fabricated and original Consent to Operate (CTO) is also false statement and so far GST enclosures are concerned, the same also appears to be fake document and not issued from Mining Office. It is further submitted that the petitioners owned a Mines at Malitok, which stands closed since 2018, hence for complicating the issue, it has been mentioned. The informant took over the agreement for sale of the said mines, but did not pay him the agreed amount and in order to pressurize the petitioners, this false case has been lodged. There is false allegation of committing theft of 16 motors from the place of occurrence. Petitioner nos. 2 & 3 undertake to cooperate in investigation and abide by all