MOHAR MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
Court: High Court of Jharkhand
Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Jharkhand judgment dated 2020-12-16. MOHAR MAHTO v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI B. A. No. 9977 of 2020 ------ 1. Mohar Mahto 2. Jagdish Mahto … Petitioners Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY ------ For the Petitioners : Mr. P. K. Rana, Advocate For the State : Mr. T. Roy, Addl. P. P. For the Informant : Mr. A. K. Sinha, Advocate ------ Order No. 02 Dated- 16. 12. 2020 Heard the parties through video conferencing. Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over. In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present. The petitioners have moved this Court for grant of bail in connection with Birni P. S. Case No. 161 of 2020 registered under sections 147/148/149/341/342/307/323/324/379 of the Indian Penal Code.
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being the member of unlawful assembly in prosecution of common object of the assembly, attempted to murder the members of informant party. It is further submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and the petitioners are old persons and there is no specific allegation against the petitioners. It is next submitted that the petitioners have been in custody since 23. 07. 2020 as has been mentioned in paragraph no. 1 of the bail application. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners undertake to cooperate with the trial of the case. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be admitted to bail. The learned Addl. P. P. and the learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer for bail. Considering the submissions of the counsels and the fact as discussed above, I am inclined to enlarge the above named petitioners on bail.
Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned C. J. M. , Giridih, in connection with Birni P. S. Case No. 161 of 2020 with the condition that the petitioner will cooperate with the trial of the case. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J. ) Sonu-Gunjan/
Source: High Court of Jharkhand. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.