Ravi Gupta @ Ravi Kumar vs The State of Jharkhand

Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.—The Petitioner is an accused in the case registered under Sections 406/420/34 I.P.C.

Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the Petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case; on reading the F.I.R, it transpires that neither there is any allegation of inducement to the informant for delivery of Poklane machine nor there is any allegation of entrustment of the said machine; the said machine had gone out of order and was standing near the work-site of the Petitioner; the alleged seizure from that place has no relevance; the Petitioner is in custody since December 2010; the Petitioner is a local permanent resident and there is no chance of his absconding.

Learned A.P.P opposed the Petitioner�s prayer for bail. However, he has not disputed the said factual contentions submitted by learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the above named Petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/-(Ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the C.J.M, Ranchi in connection with Kotwali (Sukhdeo Nagar) P.S. Case No. 657/10, corresponding to G.R. No. 4107/10.