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.

Bachchu Singh Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Bachchu Singh vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Jan 10, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/971908

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
Criminal

Case Summary

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

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bachchu Singh

Advocate Sri. Yogesh Modi

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

in the high court of jharkhand at ranchi a.b.a.no. 3682 of 2012 ----- 1. bachchu singh 2. rameshwar singh 3. sudama devi 4. mahadeo singh petitioners. versus the state of jharkhand opposite party. . ..... coram : the hon'ble mr. justice prashant kumar. ----- for the petitioners : sri. yogesh modi for the state : sri.s.s.prasad, a.p.p. ----- 03/10.01.2013. anticipatory bail application filed by bachchu singh, rameshwar singh, sudama devi and mahadeo singh is moved by sri. yogesh modi, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by sri. s.s.prasad, addl p.p. for the state. it is alleged that informant gave rs 1,11,000/- to co- accussed kedar singh, who refused to return it. in the subsequent statement, informant stated that aforesaid money given to kedar singh in presence of suresh singh, nilkanth pandey, ram prasad singh, dilip singh and baldeo prasad verma. ram prasad singh and dilip singh, in their statement stated that informant gave rs 61,000/- to kedar singh whereas suresh singh stated that dilip singh paid rs 63,500/- to kedar singh. nilkanth pandey and baldeo prasad verma, have not supported the version of informant regarding payment of money. in view of the aforesaid inconsistency in the statement of the prosecution witnesses regarding the payment of money, i allow this application and direct the petitioners, named above, to surrender in the court below by 22nd january,2013. if petitioners surrender by that time, the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioners, named above, 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 chief judicial magistrate, giridih in connection with bagodar (saria) p.s. case no. 99 of 2012, corresponding to g.r.no. 863 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the cr.p.c. ( prashant kumar, j.) raman/tanuj

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A.No. 3682 of 2012 ----- 1. Bachchu Singh 2. Rameshwar Singh 3. Sudama Devi 4. Mahadeo Singh Petitioners. Versus The State of Jharkhand Opposite Party. . ..... Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prashant Kumar. ----- For the Petitioners : Sri. Yogesh Modi For the State : Sri.S.S.Prasad, A.P.P. ----- 03/10.01.2013. Anticipatory bail application filed by Bachchu Singh, Rameshwar Singh, Sudama Devi and Mahadeo Singh is moved by Sri. Yogesh Modi, learned counsel for the petitioners and opposed by Sri. S.S.Prasad, Addl P.P. for the State. It is alleged that informant gave Rs 1,11,000/- to co- accussed Kedar Singh, who refused to return it. In the subsequent statement, informant stated that aforesaid money given to Kedar Singh in presence of Suresh Singh, Nilkanth Pandey, Ram Prasad Singh, Dilip Singh and Baldeo Prasad Verma. Ram Prasad Singh and Dilip Singh, in their statement stated that informant gave Rs 61,000/- to Kedar Singh whereas Suresh Singh stated that Dilip Singh paid Rs 63,500/- to Kedar Singh. Nilkanth Pandey and Baldeo Prasad Verma, have not supported the version of informant regarding payment of money. In view of the aforesaid inconsistency in the statement of the prosecution witnesses regarding the payment of money, I allow this application and direct the petitioners, named above, to surrender in the court below by 22nd January,2013. If petitioners surrender by that time, the court below is directed to enlarge the petitioners, named above, 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 Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih in connection with Bagodar (Saria) P.S. case no. 99 of 2012, corresponding to G.R.No. 863 of 2012, subject to the condition as laid down under section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. ( Prashant Kumar, J.) Raman/Tanuj

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial