Fekan Mandal v. The State Of Jharkhand
High Court
21 Jun 2019 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · jhar_pg
Parties
Fekan Mandal v. The State Of Jharkhand
Date of order
21 Jun 2019
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Fekan Mandal v. The State Of Jharkhand, the High Court (2019) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
Sections referenced in this judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 7393 of 2018
1. Bikash Mandal S/o Late Banku Vihari Mandal.
2. Sujit Ghosh S/o Shri Viren Ghosh.
3. Bapi Ghosh S/o Shri Sujit Ghosh.
4. Subol Ghosh S/o Late Girish Ghosh.
5. Uday Ghosh S/o Subol Ghosh.
6. Pintu Ghosh S/o Subol Ghosh.
7. Susant Ghosh @ Sushan Ghosh S/o Gajlu Ghosh.
8. Bhajan Ghosh @ Bhojan Ghosh S/o Poles Ghosh
9. Anoj Mandal S/o Khoka Mandal.
10. Khetish Mandal S/o Shri Ganesh Mandal.
11. Lalu Mandal S/o Kulesh Mandal.
12. Tetru Ghosh @ Tetaru Ghosh S/o Ishwar Lal Ghosh.
13. Tipu Ghosh S/o Tetru Ghosh.
14. Bablu Mandal S/o Subhash Mandal.
15. Sanjay Mandal S/o Bhola Mandal.
16. Sujit Mandal S/o Harish Mandal.
17. Fekan Mandal S/o Late Naresh Mandal.
……… Petitioners.
Versus
1. The State of Jharkhand
2. Deepali Mandal W/o Girin Mandal.
…………. Opposite Parties.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KAILASH PRASAD DEO
For the Petitioners : Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate.For the State : Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, A.P.P.
: Mr. Sanjay Srivastava, A.P.P.
……….
09/ Date: 21.06.2019Heard, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel forthe State.
Petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail in connection withRadhanagar P.S. case No. 42 of 2016, corresponding to G. R. No. 295 of 2016 for theoffence registered under sections 147/148/149/323/324/504 of the Indian Penal Code andunder section ¾ Explosive Substance Act.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that there is case andcounter case between the parties, which have been registered as Radhanagar P.S. CaseNo.42 of 2016 and 43 of 2016. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that inRadhanagar P.S. Case No.43 of 2016, altogether nineteen accused persons havepreferred anticipatory bail application before this Hon'ble Court, in which eighteen co-accused persons have been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated
10.05.2019 passed in ABA No.7391 of 2018 except Girin Mandal petitioner no.1 of thatapplication whose application has been rejected on the ground of his having criminalantecedent. Learned counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that thesepetitioners have no criminal antecedent. Apart from this none of the witnesses examinedunder Section 161 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that these petitioners have exploded thebomb rather from perusal of First Information Report, it appears that three unknownoutsider have assembled there too and as such, these petitioners having no criminalantecedent may be granted anticipatory bail.
Learned counsel for the State, has opposed the prayer for bail but has notdisputed the fact, that in the counter case other co-accused persons have been grantedanticipatory bail by this court and none of the witnesses examined under Section 161Cr.P.C. has alleged specific allegation about explosion of the bomb against any of thepetitioners and have no criminal antecedent also.
Learned counsel for the State, has opposed the prayer for bail but has notdisputed the fact, that in the counter case other co-accused persons have been grantedanticipatory bail by this court and none of the witnesses examined under Section 161Cr.P.C. has alleged specific allegation about explosion of the bomb against any of thepetitioners and have no criminal antecedent also.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on the basis of thematerials available on record, it appears that there is case and counter case between theparties, both are neighbors and in the counter case other co-accused persons exceptpetitioner no. 1 Girin Mandal have been granted anticipatory bail by this court vide orderdated 10.05.2019 passed in ABA No.7391 of 2018. As there is no specific allegationregarding explosion of bomb against the petitioners in the present application, petitionersnamely (1) Bikash Mandal (2)Sujit Ghosh (3) Bapi Ghosh (4)Subol Ghosh (5)Uday Ghosh(6)Pintu Ghosh (7) Susant Ghosh @ Sushan Ghosh (8)Bhajan Ghosh @ Bhojan Ghosh(9) Anoj Mandal (10) Khetish Mandal (11) Lalu Mandal (12) Tetru Ghosh @ Tetaru Ghosh(13) Tipu Ghosh (14) Bablu Mandal (15) Sanjay Mandal (16) Sujit Mandal and (17) FekanMandal are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail in the event of their surrender/arrest withinfour weeks from today, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs.10,000/-(Rupees Ten thousand) each withtwo sureties of like amount each to the satisfaction of learned S.D.J.M., Rajmahal in connection withRadhanagar P.S. Case No. 42 of 2016, corresponding to G. R. No. 295 of 2016, subject to theconditions as laid down under section 438(2) Cr.P.C. with further condition that petitioners shall co-operate in the investigation and shall physically appear before the learned trial Court on each andevery date till framing of charge.
( Kailash Prasad Deo, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.