Gurmukh Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand
2023 Latest Caselaw 3440 Jhar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                     A.B.A. No.5429 of 2022
                              ------

    Gurmukh Singh             ....   .... .... Petitioner
                              Versus
    1. The State of Jharkhand
    2. Ashok Prasad                  .... .... .... Opposite Parties
                              ------
CORAM      : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
                                      ------
     For the Petitioner         : Mr. Arun Kr. Pandey, Advocate
                                  Mr. D. K. Karmakar, Advocate
     For the State              : Ms. Lily Sahay, Addl.P.P.
     For the O.P. No.2          : Mr. Sourav Kumar, Advocate
                                      ------
     Order No.10 Dated- 11/09/2023
           Heard the parties.

Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail in connection with Complaint Case No.3204 of 2018 registered under Section 420, 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner has committed cheating by taking Rs.10,00,000/- by deceiving the complainant but not repaying the same. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioner is false. It is further submitted that for the self-same occurrence, the petitioner has been convicted by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur in Complaint Case No.286 of 2022 but still the petitioner has not deposited the fine amount. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioner be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned Addl. P.P. appearing for the State being assisted by the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 on the other hand vehemently oppose the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submit that keeping in view the conduct of the petitioner that he has been convicted in Complaint Case No.286 of 2022 vide judgment dated 17.08.2023 yet he has not paid the compensation amount of Rs.10,10,000/- as ordered in the said case; there is every chance of the petitioner absconding if given the privileges of anticipatory bail in order to avoiding undergoing sentence imposed against him. It is then submitted that there is requirement of the custodial interrogation of the petitioner during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the case. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner ought not to be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the serious nature of allegation against the petitioner of defrauding the informant/opposite party No.2 of huge amount of money and his conduct of not complying with the judgment of Complaint Case No.286 of 2022 dated 17.08.2023 of which case, the petitioner as a convict and the requirement of his custodial interrogation during the investigation of the case to find out the details of the case, this Court is of the considered view that this is not a fit case where the above named petitioner be given the privileges of anticipatory bail. Accordingly, the prayer for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail of the above named petitioner is rejected.

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) Animesh/