Gulam HussaIn Vs. the State of Jharkhand - Court Judgment |
| Criminal |
| Jharkhand High Court |
| May-20-2011 |
| B.A. No.2333 of 2011 |
| Narendra Nath Tiwari, J. |
| Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Section 379 |
| Gulam Hussain |
| The State of Jharkhand |
| Mr. A.K.Sinha, Adv |
| APP, Adv |
[narendra nath tiwari] – indian penal code – section 379 -- learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case; petitioner is a cleaner of the vehicle; the allegation of removal of the vehicle by the petitioner is wholly false and baseless; he is in custody since october, 2010; petitioner is a local permanent resident; there is no chance of his absconding. learned app opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner, but has not disputed the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.1. the petitioner is an accused in the case registered for the offence under sections 379 and 411 of the indian penal code. learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case; petitioner is a cleaner of the vehicle; the allegation of removal of the vehicle by the petitioner is wholly false and baseless; he is in custody since october, 2010; petitioner is a local permanent resident; there is no chance of his absconding. 2. learned app opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner, but has not disputed the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned chief judicial magistrate, chaibasa in connection with gua p.s. case no.04 of 2010, corresponding to g.r. case no.33 of 2010.
1. The petitioner is an accused in the case registered for the offence under sections 379 and 411 of the Indian Penal Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case; petitioner is a cleaner of the vehicle; the allegation of removal of the vehicle by the petitioner is wholly false and baseless; he is in custody since October, 2010; petitioner is a local permanent resident; there is no chance of his absconding.
2. Learned APP opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner, but has not disputed the contention made by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chaibasa in connection with Gua P.S. case no.04 of 2010, corresponding to G.R. Case no.33 of 2010.