High Court Jharkhand High Court

Arun Kumar @ Arun Lal vs State Of Jharkhand on 16 March, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Arun Kumar @ Arun Lal vs State Of Jharkhand on 16 March, 2011
       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              B.A. No.1182 of 2011

            Arun Kumar @ Arun Lal                                  .... Petitioner
                                            Versus
            The State of Jharkhand                                 ...O.P.

            Coram : The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Narendra Nath Tiwari

            For the Petitioner           : Mr. R.K.Shekhar, Advocate
            For the O.P.                : APP
                                     -----

 2/16.03.2011

The petitioner is an accused in the case registered for the offence under
sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471, 472, 379, 120B/34 of the Indian Penal Code
and section 49(1)(B), 49(2)(F)(g), 49(3)(D) of the Bihar Finance
Act.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has been
falsely implicated in the case; the allegation against the petitioner is that he has
evaded sales tax; earlier a case of similar nature has been instituted as
Dhanbad P.S. Case no.69 of 1994; the police, after investigation, submitted final
form; the petitioner has been arrested, after about 14 years in the case
instituted at Ranchi on almost similar allegation; petitioner is a business man
and has got no criminal antecedent; he is in custody since December,2010.

Learned APP opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted
that the petitioner is a resident of State of Bihar and and there is likelihood of his
absconding, if he is released on bail.

Regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case, the above
named petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of
Rs.10,000/-(ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the
satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with
Kotwali (Ranchi) P.S. case no.161 of 1996, corresponding to G.R. no.976 of
1996 with the condition that the bailors on behalf of the petitioner must be the
local permanent residents of the place within the territorial jurisdiction of learned
court below and that the petitioner shall physically appear on all the dates in the
case as and when his personal appearance is required in the court below.

( Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.)
s.b.