Nitesh Shahi v. Umeshwar Gope
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
This application stands allowed
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 438(2)
Judgment
Operative part
The State of Jharkhand --------- CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY --------- ... … Opposite Party For the Petitioners For the State : Mr. K. S. Nanda, Advocate : Mr. P. D. Agrawal, Spl.P.P. --------- 04/27.09.2022 Heard Mr. K. S. Nanda, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. P. D. Agrawal, learned Spl.P.P. for the State. The petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Basia P. S. Case No. 62 of 2022. It has been alleged that two Hywas illegally loaded with sand were apprehended by the police. Both the petitioners are the owners of the seized Hywas. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Hywas were entrusted to the driver and the same were in their custody. Learned counsel for the petitioners adds that the petitioners do not have any criminal antecedent. Regard being had to the above, I am inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Therefore, the petitioners, named above, are directed to surrender in the court below within a period of four weeks from today and on such surrender, they shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) each with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gumla in connection with Basia P. S. Case No. 62 of 2022, subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. This application stands allowed. (Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J.) Umesh/-
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: This application stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 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.