Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rajat Kulsharest Alias Kulsharest Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Rajat Kulsharest Alias Kulsharest vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Aug 19, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1024872

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Jharkhand High Court
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajat Kulsharest Alias Kulsharest

Advocate Sri. Indrajit Sinha

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand ranchi a.b.a. no. 4096 o”1. rajat kulsharest @ kulsharest 2. biren chandra pathak @ biresh chandra pathak @ b.c. pathak 3. pramod kumar verma @ p.k. verma ... ... petitioners versus 1.the state of jharkhand 2. vikramaditya pandey ... ... opp. parties coram: honble mr. justice prashant kumar ............ for the petitioners : mr. indrajit sinha for the state : mr. s.s. choudhary, a.p.p. ........ 9/19.08.2013 anticipatory bail application filed by rajat kulsharest @ kulsharest, biren chandra pathak @ biresh chandra pathak @ b.c. pathak and pramod kumar verma @ p.k. verma is moved by sri indrajit sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by sri s.s. choudhary learned additional pp. for the state. it is alleged that one employee of security department of tata steel had pressed the neck of jagat narayan pandey (deceased) due to that he died. it appears that petitioners were named in the first information report, but no overt act alleged against them in the first information report. there is no allegation against them in the case diary also. considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, i allow this anticipatory bail application and direct the petitioners to surrender in the court below on or before 29th of august 2013 and in the event of their surrender, the learned court below is directed to enlarge them on bail on furnishing bail bond of rs. 10,000/-(ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned chief judicial magistrate, hazaribagh in connection with mandu (w.b.) p.s. case no. 107 of 2012 corresponding to g.r. no. 1187 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the cr. p.c. (prashant kumar, j.) binit

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND RANCHI A.B.A. No. 4096 o”

1. Rajat Kulsharest @ Kulsharest 2. Biren Chandra Pathak @ Biresh Chandra Pathak @ B.C. Pathak 3. Pramod Kumar Verma @ P.K. Verma ... ... Petitioners Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Vikramaditya Pandey ... ... Opp. Parties CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR ............ For the Petitioners : Mr. Indrajit Sinha For the State : Mr. S.S. Choudhary, A.P.P. ........ 9/19.08.2013 Anticipatory bail application filed by Rajat Kulsharest @ Kulsharest, Biren Chandra Pathak @ Biresh Chandra Pathak @ B.C. Pathak and Pramod Kumar Verma @ P.K. Verma is moved by Sri Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri S.S. Choudhary learned Additional PP. for the State. It is alleged that one employee of security department of TATA Steel had pressed the neck of Jagat Narayan Pandey (deceased) due to that he died. It appears that petitioners were named in the first information report, but no overt act alleged against them in the first information report. There is no allegation against them in the case diary also. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I allow this anticipatory bail application and direct the petitioners to surrender in the court below on or before 29th of August 2013 and in the event of their surrender, the learned court below is directed to enlarge them on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hazaribagh in connection with Mandu (W.B.) P.S. Case No. 107 of 2012 corresponding to G.R. No. 1187 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr. P.C. (Prashant Kumar, J.) Binit

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial