Rahul Raj @ Rahul Raj Choudhary v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
- Bench
- AMBU
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order…
Judgment
CORAM: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ambuj Nath For the Petitioner: Mr. Rishu Ranjan, Advocate For the O.P-State: Mr. Tarun Kumar, A.P.P. --- --- 02 / 11.07.2023 Heard the parties.
Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Jagarnathpur (P) P.S. Case No. 102/2023 for the offences registered under sections 3(1) & 14(3) of the Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986 and section 26 of Juvenile Justice Act, pending in the court of Ms. Ruchi Dayal, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.
Offence alleged is under sections 3(1) & 14(3) of the Child Labour (Prohibition & Regulation) Act, 1986 and section 26 of Juvenile Justice Act. Petitioner is said to have employed a minor boy aged about 13 years to work in his hotel. It was submitted that the petitioner has got no criminal antecedent and this fact has been stated at para-17 of this anticipatory bail application.
Considering the aforesaid facts, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the learned court below on his surrender, shall release him on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of Ms. Ruchi Dayal, learned Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur (P) P.S. Case No. 102/2023, subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Ranjeet/ (Ambuj Nath, J)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.