TINKAL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is an accused for the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 452, 341, 342, 323, 307, 385, 386, 387, 435, 436 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case and has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. On perusal of the written report of the informant, it would appear that there is specific allegation against co- accused Riyaz Ansari and Bittu Ansari. Though as per the allegation, rest of the accused persons including the petitioner were present at the place of occurrence but their specific role has not been stated by the informant in his written report. The petitioner is in judicial custody since 09.04.2019 and as such, he may be given the privilege of regular bail.

(3.) Learned A.P.P. opposes the petitioner's prayer for bail. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, above named, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (rupees twenty thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Sessions Judge, Ramgarh in connection with Sessions Trial No. 71 of 2019.