High CourtsSingle Bench(2020) 05 JH CK 0057

Sunil Sao vs State Of Jharkhand

Jharkhand High Court · Decided on 11 May 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sujit Narayan Prasad, J
CASE NUMBER
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2012 Of 2020

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 329 words

The matter has been heard through video conferencing. There is no complaint about audio and visual connectivity.

Petitioner has filed the present application for grant of anticipatory bail expressing his apprehension of arrest for alleged offences inter-alia under Sections 47(a)/55 of the Excise Act.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State.

The case has been listed under the heading for "Order with defects".

The petitioner undertakes to remove the defect when the normal functioning of the Court will resume.

Mr. P.K.Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner assisted by Mr. Ashish Kumar, has submitted that the petitioner happens to be the landlord and subletted the house in favour of one Binod Sharma by entering into an agreement wherein one of the conditions is that if any illegality will be committed residing in his premises, it will be his sole responsibility. He further submits that the said Binod Sharma who is one of the co-accused, has been granted regular bail by this Court in B.A. No. 975 of 202 vide order dated 06.02.2020.

On the other hand, Mr. Rakesh Ranjan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has submitted that the quantity of the liquor is huge and the same has been recovered from the premises of the petitioner and that is the reason he has also been implicated in the instant case. He further submits that so far as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner about release of co-accused Binod Sharma on regular bail is concerned, he has no instruction as the copy of order granting bail has not been annexed with the instant anticipatory bail application.

At this juncture, Mr. P.K.Mukhopadhyay, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has sought for a week's time to file supplementary affidavit annexing the copy of the order extending bail to co-accused Binod Sharma.

As prayed for by learned counsel for the petitioner, list this case in the next week before appropriate available Bench.