IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
I.A. No. 820 of 2011
in
A.B.A. No. 2268 of 2010
--------
Aatma Sah @ Aatma Ray & ors. … Petitioners
Versus
State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party
——–
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D.N.PATEL
--------
For the petitioners: Mr. Santosh Kr. Tiwary, Advocate
For the State: A.P.P.
——–
Order No. 05: Dated 15th July, 2011
Per D.N.Patel, J.
1. The present interlocutory application has been preferred for the
reasons that the condition upon which the anticipatory bail was
granted to the petitioners vide order dated 28th August, 2010 in
A.B.A. No. 2268 of 2010 has not been fulfilled by the present
applicants and, therefore, the present interlocutory application has
been preferred for modification of condition no. 4(a) of the order
dated 28th August, 2010, which was imposed while granting
anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure.
2. The present applicants are involved in the offence punishable under
Sections 341, 323, 498A, 379 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code, in
pursuance of Complaint Case No. 7 of 2008, which is pending
before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa.
3. A.B.A. No. 2268 of 2010 was instituted, which was allowed on a
condition by this Court on 28th August, 2010 that the applicants shall
remain present before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Garhwa on 13th September, 2010 between 10.00 a.m. to 3.00 p.m. It
further appears from the facts of the case that the present applicants
have violated the condition upon which the anticipatory bail was
granted. They did not remain present before the concerned court i.e.
before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa. The
reasons, stated in this interlocutory application, are not sufficient
enough for remaining absent. Not to remain present on a particular
2.
date before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Garhwa,
and not to make themselves available before the Court tantamounts
to non-availability of the applicants before the court for trial.
4. In view of the aforesaid facts, there is no substance in this
interlocutory application and hence the same is hereby dismissed.
( D.N. Patel, J. )
A.K.Verma/