Md Tippu Vs. the State of Jharkhand

Md Tippu vs The State of Jharkhand

Type Court Judgment Court Jharkhand Decided Dec 19, 2012

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/972313

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/972313
Court: Jharkhand High Court
Decided On: Dec 19, 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Md Tippu

Respondent

The State of Jharkhand

Excerpt

.....clear that he runs a mobile shop and the disputed mobile was given to him for repairing but the customer did not turn up. when the police arrived at his shop, it was produced by his servant sunil kumar. how the petitioner has been made accused in this case is completely unknown. learned counsel for the state has opposed the prayer, but failed to bring on record as to why the petitioner whose statement was recorded during investigation has now been made accused in the case. contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner finds support from the case diary. further more, sunil has been granted anticipatory bail by this court. considering all these aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named is directed to appear/ surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks positively from the date of this order and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned judicial magistrate, palamau at daltongaj, in connection with chhattarpur ps case no. 88 of 2011 (gr no. 1134 of 2011), subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) cr.p.c. ambastha/- ( d.n.upadhyay,j.)

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 3421 of 2012 Md. Tippu .... Petitioner(s) Versus State of Jharkhand ... Opposite Party Coram : HONBLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.UPADHYAY For the petitioner (s): Mr. For the opposite party : Addl.P.P. 19.12.2012 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the State. This is an application for grant of anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner in connection with Chhattarpur PS case No. 88 of 2011 for the offence registered under section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. This is a case of road robbery and the accused persons have looted passers-by. During investigation, one of the looted mobile was recovered from possession of Sunil Kumar who disclosed that the said mobile phone was given to him by his Master . It is submitted that the statement of petitioner was recorded in the case diary and he was examined under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P. C. He has made it clear that he runs a mobile shop and the disputed mobile was given to him for repairing but the customer did not turn up. When the police arrived at his shop, it was produced by his servant Sunil Kumar. How the petitioner has been made accused in this case is completely unknown. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer, but failed to bring on record as to why the petitioner whose statement was recorded during investigation has now been made accused in the case. Contentions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner finds support from the case diary. Further more, Sunil has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court. Considering all these aspects of the matter, the petitioner above named is directed to appear/ surrender before the court below within a period of four weeks positively from the date of this order and on his surrender, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (rupees ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Judicial Magistrate, Palamau at Daltongaj, in connection with Chhattarpur PS case No. 88 of 2011 (GR No. 1134 of 2011), subject to the conditions laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Ambastha/- ( D.N.Upadhyay,J.)

Same Court & Year Jharkhand · 2012 Same Parties Md Tippu vs The State of Jharkhand Same Subject Education