✦ Jharkhand High Court

Satyendra Singh v. The State of Jharkhand

RANCHI A. B. A No. 5488 of 2022GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Case at a glance

Bench
GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Outcome

Bail granted

above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY For the Petitioner For the State : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate : Mr. Arup Kr. Dey, A.P.P. ----- ----- Oral Order 02 / Dated : 02.08.2022 Apprehending his arrest, petitioner- Satyendra Singh has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Bokaro Mahila P.S. Case No. 13 of 2022 registered under Sections 341, 323, 354, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code. Heard the parties. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that all the offences are bailable except Section 354 of IPC which has been added to make the offence serious in nature. It is further submitted that the petitioner has a garment shop and the informant had purchased the goods worth Rs.10,000/- in 2018 and the same was not repaid and when the petitioner demanded the said amount, this case has been filed. The Addl. P.P. opposed the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of learned counsel and the fact as discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of his arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioner named above shall 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 Court below, subject to the conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C. The petitioner will cooperate in the investigation and will appear on notice under Section 41A of Cr. P.C. and comply with the condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C. AKT (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 323, 341, 354, 504, 506; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — ss. 41A, 438(2).

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Jharkhand High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. RANCHI A. B. A No. 5488 of 2022). ← Search more judgments