Abhishek Hansda @ Chore vs State Of Jharkhand

The instant appeal has been filed under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa in M.C.A. No.890 of 2024 whereby and whereunder the prayer for regular bail of the appellant in in connection with S.T. Case No. 182 of 2024 arising out of Gua (Bara Jamda) P.S. Case No.10 of 2023, registered for the offence under Section 342/395 of the Indian Penal Code, under Section 17 of the C.L.A. Act and under Section 10/13 of the U.A.P. Act, has been rejected.

It has been contended on behalf of the appellant that it is a case where on the basis of the general and omnibus allegation the present appellant has been implicated in this case.

It has further been submitted that there is no recovery of any incriminating material. The appellant has been shown to be having one criminal antecedent but in the said case the appellant has been directed to be enlarged on bail by the concerned court itself vide order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Bail Petition No.518 of 2023.

It has further been submitted that the co-accused, namely, Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai, has been directed to be released on bail by an order passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court dated 23.04.2024 in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1813 of 2023 which has been appended as Annexure-2.

The submission has also been made that the only difference in between the case of the present appellant and the case of co-accused Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai, appellant of Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1813 of 2023, is that against Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai there was no criminal antecedent but against the present appellant there is one criminal antecedent.

It has further been submitted that the charge has already been framed and the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 12.12.2023.

Learned counsel, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that it is a fit case to interfere with the impugned order.

While on the other hand, Mr. Rajneesh Vardhan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the State, has vehemently opposed the prayer to interfere with the impugned order.

It has been submitted that there is direct involvement of the present appellant, as would be evident from the First Information Report as also the appellant is having one criminal antecedent.

Learned State counsel, based upon the aforesaid grounds, has submitted that the impugned order may not be interfered with.

This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties, gone across the finding recorded by the learned court in the impugned order as also the case diary.

The co-accused, namely, Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai, has been directed to be released on bail vide order dated 23.04.2024 passed in Criminal Appeal (DB) No.1813 of 2023.

This Court, in order to examine the case of the present appellant on the principle of parity, has gone through the F.I.R. and found that the imputation so made against co-accused Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai and the imputation made against the present appellant is identical. The only difference as has been submitted by the learned State counsel is that against the said Daso Kerai @ Paso Kerai there is no antecedent but against the present appellant one criminal antecedent is there.

So far as one criminal antecedent against the present appellant is concerned, as per the submission made on behalf of the appellant, the appellant has already been directed to be released on bail by the concerned court itself vide order dated 10.01.2024 passed in Bail Petition No.518 of 2023.

Further, the charge has already been framed and the appellant is languishing in judicial custody since 12.12.2023, therefore, this Court is of the view that the impugned order needs to be interfered with.

Accordingly order dated 13.08.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa in M.C.A. No.890 of 2024, is hereby quashed and set aside.

In consequence thereof, the instant appeal stands allowed.

Accordingly, the appellant, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Chaibasa, in connection with S.T.Case No.182 of 2024 arising out of Gua (Bara Jamda) P.S. Case No.10 of 2023, subject to the conditions that the appellant shall co-operate in the trial and shall not absent himself on the date fixed without any cogent cause. Subject to further condition that one of the bailors should be the father/near relative of the appellant. In failure, the learned trial court shall have liberty to pass appropriate order in accordance with law so that trial be not hindered.

The instant criminal appeal stands disposed of.