Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Indrajit Chakraborty – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. delete deceased opposite party from cause title. (Para 1) |
| 2. complaint originated under section 340 crpc; bail cancelled. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. petitioner claims procedural error; respondents cite evasion. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. no evidence of bail violation grounds like tampering. (Para 6) |
| 5. must rule on representation plea absent appearance direction. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 6. quash orders for illegality; restore petitioner's bail. (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
I.A. No.17360 of 2025
Heard the parties.
This Interlocutory Application has been filed with the prayer to delete the Opposite Party No.2 namely Kaushik Dutt of this criminal miscellaneous petition, who died in the month of October, 2024.
Considering the aforesaid fact, the prayer is allowed.
Registry is directed to delete the opposite party No.2 in the cause title of this Cr.M.P. and renumber the present opposite party No.3 as opposite party No.2 with red ink.
Interlocutory Application is disposed of accordingly.
Cr.M.P. No.3581 of 2023
This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with the prayer to quash the order da
Bail cancellation invalid without deciding accused's representation application when no prior personal appearance direction exists, and solely for not furnishing pending appeal status, absent violati....
The court established that failing to appear in court when granted bail violates bail conditions, leading to potential cancellation of bail.
Compliance with court orders is essential for an accused on bail, and the power of revision does not extend to interlocutory orders.
Accused released on bail must comply with the conditions of the bail bond, including appearing in court as directed, especially in cases involving non-bailable offences.
Cancellation of bail requires substantial grounds indicating misuse or misconduct; mere allegations of injustice without evidence do not suffice for revocation.
The Court clarified that while a bail order is interlocutory and not subject to revision, the Sessions Judge retains the power to cancel bail under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Anticipatory bail not cancelled absent evidence of tampering, threats, or flight; partnership profit disputes deemed civil without initial deception, despite cheating allegations.
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
