MD JALISUL HASSAN ALIAS MD JALISUL HASAN v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND
A.B.A./5747/2024 · 2025-04-30
Sri Ananda Sen
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34952 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 34952 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
2025:JHHC:12930 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 5747 of 2024 ------ Md. Jalisul Hassan @ Md. Jalisul Hasan, aged about 28 years S/o Noorul Hoda, R/o Village-Milki, Kasba, Baraidgah, P.O. & P.S.- Amour, District-Purnia (Bihar)
… … Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand.
… … Opposite Party ------ CORAM: SRI ANANDA SEN, J. ------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Prakash, Advocate. For the State : Ms. Nehala Sharmin, A.P.P. ----- 06/ 30.04.2025
1. Heard the parties.
2. This anticipatory bail application under Section 482 and 484 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023, has been preferred by the petitioner apprehending his arrest for offences under Sections 420, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 66(C) and 66(D) of the I.T. Act, in connection with Simdega P.S. Case No. 199 of 2022 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 13 of 2024, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Simdega.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the money trailwhich was found in the account of the petitioner is not obtained by illegal means. In fact, it is the petitioner who had taken loan from Abu Reza and he has returned the money to Abu Reza. He submits that Abu Reza has already been granted bail.
4. Learned counsel for the State submits that this is the case where Abu Reza and Ors. have cheated the informant person and fraudulently withdrawn money. Money of several person has been misappropriated by Abu Reza and this petitioner is also part of conspiracy. Person were duped in the name of investment.
2025:JHHC:12930 2
5. Though this petitioner happens to be the uncle of Abu Reza and there are some transactions in the bank account but the fact which cannot be lost sight of is that there is similar nature of case also pending against the petitioner.
6. Considering the fact that there is similar nature of case pending against the petitioner, this is not a case to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Considering the nature and the fact of the case, this Anticipatory Bail Application stands dismissed.
(ANANDA SEN, J.) Rashmi/ Cp-2