High Court Jharkhand High Court

Manoj Sao @ Manoj Sahu vs State Of Jharkhand on 20 April, 2011

Jharkhand High Court
Manoj Sao @ Manoj Sahu vs State Of Jharkhand on 20 April, 2011
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

                        A.B.A. No. 534 of 2011
                               with
                        A.B.A. No. 543 of 2011

           Manoj Sao @ Manoj Sahu...       ....Petitioner ( in ABA 534/11)
           Deoki Ram              .......Petitioner ( in ABA 543/11)

                              Vs.
           The State of Jharkhand ... .......Opposite Party( in both cases)

CORAM:     HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRASHANT KUMAR

           For the Petitioners:       Mr. Jaiprakash, Sr. Advocate
                                      ( in ABA 534/11)
                                      Mr. Yogesh Modi
                                      ( in ABA 543/11)
           For the State:             Mrs. M. Palit , APP ( in ABA 534/11)
                                      Mr. S.K. Srivastava, APP
                                      ( in ABA 543/11)

5/20.04.2011

: Both the anticipatory bail applications arose from the

same, thus are heard together and disposed of by this order.

Heard Sri Jaiprakash for the petitioners and Ms. M. Palit ,

learned Additional P.P. for the State.

Investigating Officer is present in court in compliance of

order dated 18.4.2011. On query, after going through the case diary,

Investigating Officer was not able to produce any evidence to show

that the rice seized from the tempo of petitioner Manoj Sao @ Manoj

Sahu loaded from fair price shop of petitioner Deoki Ram. It appears

that Investigating Officer sent a report to C.J.M., Chatra stating that

investigation reveals that the occurrence is true but he has not been

able to show the basis on which he gave that report. Till now

Investigating Officer is not able to establish that the rice seized in this

case was allotted to fair price of petitioner Deoki Ram. I.O. has also not

made any enquiry or investigation on the claim of Bimal Sao, who filed

an application for release of rice being its owner. Thus, I find that

Investigating Officer is not performing his duty properly.

Since, there is nothing in the case diary as well as in the

FIR to establish that the rice in question was sold in black marketing

from fair price shop of petitioner Deoki Ram, I allow these anticipatory

bail applications and direct the petitioners to surrender in the court

below by 29.04.2011 and in that even the court below is directed to

enlarge both petitioners of aforesaid anticipatory bail applications, on
-2-

bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/-( Ten Thousand)each with

two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial

Magistrate, Chatra in connection with Tandwa P.S. Case No. 3 of 2011 (

G.R. No. 28 of 2011), subject to the condition as laid down under

section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Let this order be communicated to the DGP, Jharkhand ,

Ranchi for taking disciplinary action against the I.O. concerned.

( Prashant Kumar,J.)

Sharda/-