JHARKHAND HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON RAM PRASAD SAHU V/S THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

RANCHI, India, May 28 -- Jharkhand High Court issued the following order on April 28:

1. Heard the parties.

2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest, for offences under Sections 417, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B, 323, 341, 385, 504 and 506 IPC.

3. Learned counsel representing the State and the informant oppose the prayer for anticipatory bail.

4. From the records, I find that the allegation is that the land belongs to the informant and his sister. Thereafter, a power of attorney was executed by them in the name of Taniya Basu. It is alleged that by virtue of the said power of attorney, the land was sold but the amount has not been credited in the account of the land holder i.e. the Principal who has executed the power of attorney.

5. Admittedly the petitioner is none but the cousin of the informant. It is alleged that he was also involved in the entire transaction. The fact which emerges is that the power of attorney is between the informant and one Taniya Basu. The petitioner is neither the purchaser nor any amount has been credited in the account of this petitioner. The only allegation is that he was instrumental in getting the power of attorney executed in the name of Taniya Basu.

6. Considering the nature of allegation and the fact that the power of attorney was executed by the informant in the name of Taniya Basu and no amount has been credited in the account of this petitioner, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on anticipatory bail.

7. Accordingly, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands allowed. The petitioner, above named, is directed to surrender before the learned court below within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on the event of his surrender or arrest, he shall be released on bail on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ramgarh, in connection with Mandu P.S. Case No.180 of 2022, subject to the condition that one of the bailers should be a close relative of the petitioner and other should be a resident of State of Jharkhand, having sufficient landed property in his name or in the name of his ancestors in which he is having share and to that effect, he has to file an affidavit before the Trial Court indicating his share in the property.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.