Allowed

Sonu Ansari Alias MD Sonu Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC15 Mar 2022A.B.A./1872/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with an FIR under various sections of the IPC regarding alleged encroachment and use of force. The court imposed conditions including depositing security, restricting movement, and cooperating with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail to the extent of release on bail upon arrest or surrender within six weeks, subject to depositing security, furnishing bond with sureties, and adhering to specified conditions.

Sonu Ansari Alias MD Sonu Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B. A. No. 1872 of 2022

¶2

Sonu Ansari @ Md. Sonu Ansari

¶3

Md. Sabbar @ Md. Sabbar Ansari … Petitioners

¶4

Versus

¶5

The State of Jharkhand

¶6

… Opposite Party

¶7

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶8

For the Petitioners : Mr. Ayub Ansari ,Adv. For the State : Mr. Abhay Kr. Tiwari ,Addl. P.P.

¶9

02 / 15.03.2022 Heard the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners personally undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter within two weeks.

¶11

In view of the personal undertaking given by learned counsel for the petitioners the defects pointed out by the Stamp Reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

Apprehending their arrest, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 32 of 2021 registered under Sections 147, 149, 447, 353, 332, 504 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners being the members of an unlawful assembly, in prosecution of common object of the assembly, encroached the land of CCL and when the CCL patrolling team reached there and forbade the petitioners and others from encroaching the said land, they used criminal force against the informant and others and deterred them from discharging their duty and also pelted stones. It is then submitted that the allegations against the petitioners are all false and those allegations are general and omnibus in nature. It is next submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate with the investigation of the case and also undertakes to furnish sufficient

¶14

security including cash security and they undertake not to go to or near the place of occurrence land nor will indulge in similar type of offence in any manner during pendency of the case hence, the petitioners be given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

The learned Addl. PP opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶16

Considering aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to grant the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Hence, in the event of arrest by the police or surrender within a period of six weeks from the date of this order, the petitioners shall be released on bail on depositing Rs. 10,000/- each as cash security and on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Giridih in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 32 of 2021 subject to the condition that the petitioners will not go to or near the place of occurrence land nor will indulge in similar type of offence in any manner during pendency of the case and will co-operate with the Investigation of the case and will appear before the Investigating Officer as and when noticed by him and will submit mobile number and photocopy of Aadhaar card at the time of surrender in the court below with an undertaking not to change mobile number during the pendency of the case along with the other conditions laid down under section 438 (2) Cr. P.C.

¶17

( ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.)

¶18

Smita/-

Sonu Ansari Alias MD Sonu Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Ansari Alias MD Sonu Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jaleshwar Gope Vs the Union of India through Central Bureau of Investigation Ranchi

Dablu Kumar Alias Awadhesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pravin Burman Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ritesh Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Devnarayan Karamkar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sulochana Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand