Chandan Kumar @ Chandan v. The State of Jharkhand
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVNEET KUMAR For the Petitioner For the State ------ : Mr. Amit Kumar Choubey, Advocate : Mr. Bishwambhar Shastri, A.P.P. Mr. Someshwar Roy, A.P.P. -------- Order No. 02 / Dated 06th January, 2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State.
The petitioner is an accused in connection with Manatu P.S. Case No.22 of 2024 (S.T. No.439 of 2024) dated 03.07.2024 for the offence registered under Sections 126(2), 109, 3(5) of Bhartiya Nayay Sanhita 2023 and 27 of Arms Act, pending in the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau at Daltonganj.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the gist of the allegation as set out in the F.I.R. is that the informant and his mother-in-law had sustained fire arm injuries and the F.I.R. was instituted against three unknown persons and later on the name of this petitioner has appeared on the basis of suspicion and his confessional statement. It has been pointed out that there is no incriminating fact has transpired to corroborate the allegation against this petitioner. Further it has been stated that the similarly situated to co-accused persons, namely, Prem Shankar Mehta in B.A. No.9898 of 2024 vide order dated 29.11.2024 & Itkhar Ansari @ Istekhar Ansari @ Itekhar Ansari in B.A. No.8197 of 2024 vide order dated 18.09.2024 have been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, respectively. Further it has been submitted that charge-sheet in this case has been submitted and petitioner is in jail since, 02.07.2024 and possibility of tampering the evidence is very remote and therefore he deserves to be enlarged on bail.
On the other hand, the learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State has opposed the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner and submitted that the petitioner is directly involved in the offence of attempt to murder and therefore he does not deserve to be enlarged on bail although he did not controvert this fact that the similarly situated co-accused persons namely, Prem Shankar Mehta in B.A. No.9898 of 2024 vide order dated
29.11.2024 & Itkhar Ansari @ Istekhar Ansari @ Itekhar Ansari in B.A. No.8197 of 2024 vide order dated 18.09.2024 have been enlarged on bail by the Coordinate Bench of this Court, respectively
Having heard the parties, perused the records of this case. In light of the forceful submission advanced on behalf of the petitioner and under the facts and circumstances of this case, this petitioner is directed to be enlarged 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 the Court of Learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau at Daltonganj, in connection with Manatu P.S. Case No.22 of 2024 (S.T. No.439 of 2024), subject to the condition that the petitioner will cooperate in the criminal proceeding pending in the learned Trial Court and he will remain present on each and every date of the criminal trial as and when required, failing which, appropriate order shall be passed by the learned Court below for the cancellation of the bail as per the provision of law. Basant/S. Das (Navneet Kumar, J.) 2 B.A. No.11026 of 2024
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.