✦ Jharkhand High Court

Charku Mahto v. The State of Jharkhand

ARIF ANSARI ABA No. 7308 of 2022GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY

Case at a glance

Outcome

Bail granted

discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed

Provisions considered

Judgment

Operative part

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GAUTAM KUMAR CHOUDHARY ----- For the Petitioners For the State : Mr. Santosh Kumar, Advocate : Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P. ----- Oral Order 03/Dated: 27.09.2022 The anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of petitioners, namely Charku Mahto and Arif Ansari who are apprehending their arrest in connection with Mahuwatand PS Case No. 13 of 2022, corresponding to G.R. No.658 of 2022, for the offence registered under Sections 414/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 21 of MMRD Act, 1957, pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Bermo at Tenughat, is pressed into motion. Heard the parties. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioners are the owner of the seized tractors from which 100 cft. and 735 cft. sand were loaded. The learned APP opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the learned counsels and the facts as discussed above, the anticipatory bail application is allowed. Hence, in the event of their arrest or surrender within a period of two weeks from the date of this order, the petitioners named above shall be released on bail on depositing Rs.10,000/- each as cash security money and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each 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 petitioners 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. Rohit/- (Gautam Kumar Choudhary, J.)

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

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

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 34, 414; 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. ARIF ANSARI ABA No. 7308 of 2022). ← Search more judgments