The division judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court granted bail to the accused person involved under Sections 435, 387, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act, and Sections 13, 15, 16, and 20 of the UAP Act while holding that when the appellant on its own wisdom has surrendered under the policy of surrender, then it would not be proper for the Court not to consider the prayer for bail, otherwise, the entire object and intent of the surrender policy will become futile.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the present appeal is filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against an order passed by the Learned Additional Session Judge in which the regular bail was rejected in connection with the case registered for the offence under Sections 435, 387 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and Sections 13, 15, 16 and 20 of the UAP Act.
Contentions of the Appellant
The Appellant contended that the Appellant had been falsely implicated in the present case. it was furthermore contended that the Appellant surrendered to his own wisdom as per the policy formulated by the State of Jharkhand.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that the fact regarding the surrender of an accused person is not in dispute and the basic agenda behind the scheme was to bring the extremists to the mainstream who have deviated from the mainstream.
It was furthermore observed that the entire purpose and objective of the surrender policy will be rendered meaningless if this Court does not take the appellant's request for bail into consideration after it has, of its own free will, surrendered under the terms of the policy.
Based on these considerations, the court quashed and set aside the order passed by the learned Additional Session Judge.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court disposed of the criminal appeal.
Case Title: Binod Das @ Binod Pandit V. The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad, and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Rai
Case No.: Criminal Appeal (D.B.) No.1338 of 2023
Advocate for the Appellant: Mr. Gaurav, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Mr. Satish Prasad, A.P.P.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
