Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
RAJESH SHANKAR
Ramesh Prasad @ Ramesh K. Kusuwaha, son of Sri Sahdeo Prasad @ Sahdeo Mahto – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
Order :
(Rajesh Shankar, J.)
1. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 354, 498- A, 504, 506 and 120-B/34 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with Complaint Case No.3819 of 2023 pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Hazaribag.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner’s anticipatory bail application was earlier rejected by this Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 passed in A.B.A. No.3088 of 2024. By way of present anticipatory bail application, the petitioner has renewed his prayer for grant of anticipatory bail primarily for the reason that subsequent to rejection of his anticipatory bail application, no cognizance for the offence under Section 376 of the I.P.C. against the petitioner and three other co- accused persons has been taken by the concerned trial court as would be evident from the order dated 12th January, 2024. Hence, the allegation made in paragraph no.18 of the complaint gets falsified. Under the said changed circumstance, the petitioner may be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.
3. Learned A.P.P. while opposing the petitioner’s prayer for anticipatory ba
Anticipatory bail is denied when cognizance has been taken under serious charges, emphasizing the gravity of the allegations.
Anticipatory bail cannot be granted when prior applications have been rejected on merit and there has been non-compliance with Supreme Court directives without any change in circumstances.
Anticipatory bail – Specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by same Judge.
Points OF The Law : Perused first information report as well as the statement recorded by the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
The seriousness of the offence under Section 395 of the IPC may warrant custodial interrogation, influencing the decision on anticipatory bail applications.
The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. due to parity with co-accused who had previously been granted bail.
The court granted anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code, emphasizing the need for cooperation in the investigation while addressing the validity of serious allegations.
Grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced at the bar.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
