Abulais Mian @ Abulais @ Md. ... vs The State Of Jharkhand
2022 Latest Caselaw 4530 Jhar

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                  (Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)
                         B.A .No. 10381 of 2022

Abulais Mian @ Abulais @ Md. Abulais Minyan               ... ... Petitioner
                                   Versus
The State of Jharkhand                                ... ... Opposite Party
                              ------

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RATNAKER BHENGRA

-------

      For the Petitioner       : Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate
      For the State            : Mr. Ravi Prakash , APP
                                  --------
                         th
Order No. 04 /Dated: 11 November 2022

Heard Mr. Vikram Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Ravi Prakash, the learned APP for the State.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that this petitioner has not been arrested from the spot and no incriminating material has been recovered from personal possession of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner has been implicated only on the basis of confession of co-accused who was arrested on the spot. Learned counsel also points from para 14 of the application and submits that the names persons who apprehended on spot, namely, Gautam Kumar Pandey, Ramjit Bhuiyan, Parmeshwar Mahto, Kailash Mahto and Chhotu Ganjhu have been acquitted by the court below vide judgment dated 30.05.2022 and therefore if the case of main accused does not survive, this case stands on better footing. He further submits that in any way , the accused accused, namely, Parmeshwar Mahto has been granted bail in B.A. No. 2667 of 2017 vide order dated 08.06.2017, co-accused Ramjeet Bhuiyan @ Ramjit Bhuiyan has been granted bail in B.A. No. 2499 of 2017 vide order dated 12.06.2017 and co-accused Dablu Sao @ Vivek Kumar @ Dablu Kumar has been granted bail in B.A. No. 13416 of 2021 vide order dated 14.12.2021 by different Benches of this Court.

Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the bail application, however, has not denied the cited judgment of the court below and bail orders.

Having heard both counsels, gone through the records of the case and in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to release the petitioner, named above, on bail, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-Vth, Chatra in connection with Chatra Sadar P.S. Case No. 299 of 2016.

(Ratnaker Bhengra, J.) Sharda/