Md. Chand v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD, NAVNEET KUMAR
Outcome
Allowed
In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed
Provisions considered
- National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 s. 21(4)
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 ss. 3(5), 179, 318(2)
Key paragraphs
- Para 1717. Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Alankar/ (Navneet Kumar, J.)
Judgment
CORAM :HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR ------ For the Appellants For the Respondents : Mr. Subodh Kumar Dubey, APP : Mr. P.A.S. Pati, Advocate Order No. 05 : Dated 12th December, 2024 --------
The instant appeal, filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigating Agency Act, 2008, is directed against the order dated 24.08.2024 passed in Bail Petition No. 178 of 2024 by learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella in connection with Seraikella P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024 registered under Sections 179,318(2)/3(5) of BNS, whereby and whereunder the bail of the appellants have been rejected.
It has been contended on behalf of appellants that it is case where the appellants have falsely been implicated in this case by virtue of victim of the circumstances since they have been apprehended at the time when they were shopping in the market.
It has been submitted that they have been made victim of the counterfeit currency and having no knowledge with respect to the aforesaid fake currency and unintentionally - 2 - has handed over the said money in favour of shopkeeper and only for that they have been implicated in this case.
Further contention has been raised that even the seized currency has not been sent for examination before the Forensic Science Laboratory.
It has further been contented that the appellants have no criminal antecedents and they are languishing in judicial custody since 03.08.2024 in a case where the charge- sheet has already been submitted.
Learned counsel for the appellants, based upon the aforesaid ground has submitted that it is fit case for interference with the impugned order.
While on the other hand, learned APP has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted no interference is required with the impugned order.
It has been submitted that the counterfeit currency of Rs. 500/- total nine in number amounting to Rs. 4500/- has been recovered from the physical possession of the appellants. It has been submitted that it is incorrect on the part of the appellants to submit that they had no idea about the counterfeit currency, rather they purposely knowing fully well that it is the fake currency, purchased with the aid of counterfeit currency.
Learned State counsel based upon the aforesaid ground has submitted that it is a fit case which requires no interference by this Court. - 3 -
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone across the finding recorded by the learned court in the impugned order.
It is evident from the material available on record that with counterfeit currency of the denomination of Rs. 500/- nine in number total amounting to Rs. 4500/- the appellants purchased chicken and went therefrom. But, on suspicion the informant searched the appellants and handed over to them to police. But, it is admitted fact that those currency notes were not sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for their examination by the expert.
It further appears that the charge-sheet has already been submitted and the appellants are languishing in judicial custody since 03.08.2024, as such this Court, is of the view that the impugned order requires interference.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated 24.08.2024 passed in Bail Petition No. 178 of 2024 by learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella in connection with Seraikella P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024 is hereby quashed and set aside.
Operative part
In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed. In consequence thereof, the appellants, above named, are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Seraikella-Kharsawan in connection with Seraikella P.S. Case No. 94 of 2024, - 4 - subject to the conditions that the appellants shall co- operate in the trial and shall not absent themselves on the date fixed without any cogent cause; and shall not commit offence of the like nature. In failure, the learned court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered and further that one of the bailors should be close relative of the appellants, which is to be accompanied by affidavit justifying that such bailor is close relative of the appellants.
It is made clear that any observation(s) made hereinabove is only for the purpose of consideration of bail having no bearing with the trial.
Accordingly, the instant appeal stands disposed of. (Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.) Alankar/ (Navneet Kumar, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: In view thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 — s. 21(4); Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — ss. 3(5), 179, 318(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.