Amir Khan vs The State Of Jharkhand
2021 Latest Caselaw 743 Jhar

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                A. B. A. No. 7511 of 2020
                                   ---

           Amir Khan                      ... ...  Petitioner
                                  Versus
           1.The State of Jharkhand
           2.Md. Wasim Khan                          ...       ...      Opposite Parties
                                       ---
           CORAM        : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
                                  ---
           For the Petitioner     : Mr. Manoj Kumar Choubey, Advocate

For the Opposite Party : Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, A.P.P.

---

2/17.02.2021 Heard the parties.

Defects as pointed out by the office are ignored. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bank More P.S. Case No. 136 of 2020.

It has been alleged that extortion money of Rs. 5 lacs was being demanded by the accused persons accompanied with threats to murder him if the amount is not paid.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the anticipatory bail granted to the co-accused persons in A.B.A. No. 5296 of 2020 which was subject to deposit of Rs. 30,000/- as ad-interim victim compensation. So far as the allegations are concerned, the same are specific against the petitioner for demanding extortion from the informant. With respect to the ad-interim victim's compensation as a condition of bail imposed by the court, it has been held by this court in Cr. M. P. No. 2194 of 2020 that,

40. "In a situation, if at the stage of grant of bail or at any stage prior to pronouncement of judgment, the Court directs the accused to pay compensation to the victim, then, ultimately, if the accused is acquitted holding him to be innocent, then, by virtue of the order of the Court, an innocent person, who has not committed the offence will be forced to pay the compensation. This is not what the law provides for. A person, who has got no connection with the offence or has got nothing to do with the offence or is 21 innocent, cannot be directed to compensate any one. If ultimately, the accused is declared innocent and is acquitted, he will have a right to recover the amount he has paid as compensation pursuant to the order passed by the Court. This will not only give rise to unnecessary litigation, but, will also cause undue and uncalled for harassment and hardship to the victim, who by that time, may have utilized the entire money.

................

45. Compensation is ordered to be paid by a Court only after a finding is arrived that the person, directed to pay compensation, has caused any injury by committing a wrong or has committed a breach of a legal obligation, be it statutory or contractual. Thus, to direct an accused to pay any compensation or victim compensation under Section 357A of the Code at the stage of bail by terming it as a condition of bail also may amount to prejudging the guilt of an accused and such a course of action runs completely contrary to the basic principle of criminal jurisprudence, i.e., presumption of innocence until proven guilty."

On consideration of the aforesaid facts, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

Accordingly, this application stands rejected. However, if the petitioner surrenders before the court below within three weeks and prays for bail, the learned court below shall endeavour to get the bail application disposed of at the earliest without being prejudiced by this order.

(Rongon Mukhopadhyay, J)

R. Shekhar Cp 3