Jharkhand High Court
Dilip Kumar Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand ... Opposite ... on 5 January, 2024
Author: Anil Kumar Choudhary
Bench: Anil Kumar Choudhary
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 10546 of 2023
------
1. Dilip Kumar Singh
2. K.K. Singh @ Kishor Kr. Singh @ Kishore Kumar Singh
... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party
------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
------
For the Petitioners : Mr. R.S. Mazumdar, Sr. Advocate
For the State : Mr. Satish Prasad, Addl. P.P.
------
Order No.02 Dated- 05.01.2024
Heard the parties.
Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this
Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with
Saraidhela P.S. Case No.97 of 2021 registered under sections 419/
420/341/323/506/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submits that this
is the second journey of the petitioners before this Court in
connection with their prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory
bail. It is further submitted that the petitioners earlier filed A.B.A.
No. 5237 of 2021 and as the petitioner undertook to jointly pay
Rs.36,77,000/- to the informant without prejudice to their defence in
the case, this Court vide its order dated 09.08.2021, passed in the said
A.B.A. No. 5237 of 2021 granted the privilege of anticipatory bail to
the petitioners on the condition that they shall jointly deposit a
demand draft of Rs.36,77,000/- drawn in favour of the informant
without prejudice to their defence in the case and on furnishing bail
bond and upon their surrendering before the trial court within six
weeks from the date of the said order dated 09.08.2021. The
petitioners did not comply the order and did not surrender before
the trial court within six weeks from the order dated 09.08.2021. It is
next submitted by the learned senior counsel for the petitioners that
thereafter, the petitioners filed Cr.M.P. No. 2331 of 2021. The learned
counsel for the petitioners on 08.10.2021 submitted that the
petitioners will file a supplementary affidavit annexing therewith
copy of the demand draft of Rs.36,77,000/- drawn in favour of the
informant. This Court vide a peremptory order dated 08.10.2021,
passed in the said Cr.M.P. No. 2331 of 2021 granted three months'
time to the petitioners from 08.10.2021, to file the said
supplementary affidavit before this Court, failing which, the said
criminal miscellaneous petition shall stand dismissed without
further reference to the Bench. The petitioners did not comply their
undertaking and did not file the supplementary affidavit, hence the
criminal miscellaneous petition no. 2331 of 2021 filed before this
Court was dismissed for non-compliance of the peremptory order. It
is next submitted that the petitioners filed Special Leave to Appeal
(Crl.) No. 3386 of 2021 arising out of impugned final judgment and
order dated 09.08.2021 in A.B.A. No. 5237 of 2021, passed by this
Court before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and vide order
dated 13.04.2022, the Hon'ble Supreme Court passed the following
order:-
"Though we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned
judgment, at the request of the learned counsel for the petitioners,
the petitioners are granted eight weeks' time to make payment of the
amount which they agreed to pay before the High Court. In case, the
payment is not made within the aforesaid period/time, the
State/Police will proceed in accordance with law.
Recording the aforesaid, the petition for special leave to appeal is
disposed of.
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of."
The petitioners did not make the payment in terms of the said
order dated 13.04.2022, passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India. The petitioners before filing Cr.M.P. No. 2331 of 2021 also filed
one Cr.M.P. No. 1967 of 2021 but the learned senior counsel
appearing for the petitioners submits that he does not know what
was the prayer in the said Cr.M.P. No. 1967 of 2021 but the learned
counsel appearing in the said Cr.M.P. No. 1967 of 2021 submitted
before a Coordinate Bench of this Court that in view of the order
passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioners sought
permission to withdraw the Cr.M.P. No. 1967 of 2021 and
accordingly the same was dismissed as withdrawn. The petitioners
also filed Miscellaneous Application No. 1584 of 2022 in Special
Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 3386 of 2022, before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India but the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India was not
inclined to entertain the said application for extension of time and
dismissed the said Miscellaneous Application. The petitioners then
filed Cr.M.P. No. 4449 of 2022 before this Court with a prayer for
quashing the entire criminal proceeding but a coordinate Bench of
this Court vide order dated 21.09.2023 held that the materials in the
record makes out a prima facie case for the offences of which the
petitioners are the accused and the refund of the amount during the
pendency of the criminal case does not obliterate the offence and
dismissed the said Cr.M.P. No. 4449 of 2022. It is submitted by the
learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the fresh ground is
that the petitioners have refunded the amount to the tune of
Rs.46,00,000/- to the informant during the pendency of Cr.M.P. No.
4449 of 2023 and as the petitioners could not fulfill the condition
imposed by this Court in A.B.A. No. 5237 of 2021 during the
stipulated time, hence it is submitted that the petitioners be given
the privilege of anticipatory bail.
The learned Addl. P.P. on the other hand vehemently opposes
the prayer for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail of the petitioners
and submits that the petitioners have no regard for law and they
have violated the undertaking given before this Court as well as
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and did not pay the
amount undertaken to be paid by them both before this Court and
before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. It is next submitted that
the allegations against the petitioners are of serious nature and there
is every chance of the petitioners absconding if released on bail and
their custodial interrogation is also required during the investigation
of the case to find out the details of the case. Hence, it is submitted
that the petitioners ought not to be given the privilege of
anticipatory bail.
Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going
through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to
mention here that the petitioners were earlier granted the
anticipatory bail but they have not abided by the same and they
have not surrendered before the trial court in terms of the said order
dated 09.08.2021, passed by this Court in A.B.A. No. 5237 of 2021,
without any rhyme or reason. The petitioners from their conduct,
appear to be mischievous persons. They have made false
undertaking before this Court as well as before the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India. Considering the serious nature of allegation against
the petitioners and the requirement of their custodial interrogation
during the investigation of the case as also the chances of their
absconding, if released on bail and also tampering with the
evidence, this Court is not inclined to give the privilege of
anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for grant
of privilege of anticipatory bail of the above named petitioners is
rejected.
(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.)
Sonu-Gunjan//
