Allowed

Indradeo Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC3 Feb 2022A.B.A./367/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand, considering an undertaking to remove stamp defects and the arguments of the State, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioners in connection with a criminal case. The Court directed surrender to the J.M. Court in Hazaribag within six weeks and made the enlargement on bail conditional upon depositing an interim victim compensation amount and furnishing specific bonds.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to surrender within six weeks, depositing a demand draft of Rs.40,000 as interim victim compensation, and furnishing a bail bond of Rs.25,000 with two sureties.

Indradeo Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.367 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

Indradeo Yadav

¶4

The State of Jharkhand

¶5

------

¶6

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶7

For the Petitioners : Mr. Nawal Kishor Pandey, Advocate For the State : Mr. Naveen Kr. Gaunjhu, Addl.P.P

¶8

Order No.02 Dated- 03.02.2022

¶9

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to remove the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after resumption of the court in physical mode.

¶11

In view of personal undertaking given by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

¶12

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Barhi P.S. Case No.177 of 2020 instituted under Sections 188, 147, 148, 149, 341, 342, 323, 379, 354, 307, 427, 452, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 3 of Jharkhand State Epidemic (COVID- 19) Regulation/Act, 2020 and Section 51 (B) of Disaster Management Act, 2005, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶13

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that the petitioners were the members of an unlawful assembly and being armed with deadly weapons committed theft of mangoes from the mango orchard and when the same was prohibited they called 150 other villagers and they assaulted and abused the informant, outraged the modesty of Sunita Devi, kidnapped Sunita Devi and caused injuries to Vasudev Singh and abducted Sita Ram Singh. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is also submitted that the co-accused, with similar allegations, have already been given the privileges of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 02.02.2022 passed in A.B.A. No.326 of 2022. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case and undertake to jointly pay ad interim victim

¶14

compensation of Rs.40,000/- without prejudice to their defence in this case in favour of the informant. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners.

¶16

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court of learned J.M.-1^st Class, Hazaribag within six weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs.40,000/- as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to their defence in this case drawn in favour of the informant and on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned J.M.-1^st Class, Hazaribag in connection with Barhi P.S. Case No.177 of 2020 with the condition that they will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish their mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶17

In case the petitioners deposit the said demand draft, the court below is directed to issue notice to the informant of this case and on his proper identification, the court below shall handover the same to him forthwith.

¶18

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶19

Animesh/

Indradeo Yadav v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indradeo Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Karmali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sanjit Kumar Gupta Alias Sanjit Kumar Bhadani Vs the State of Jharkhand

Munchun Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Akbar Alias Akbar Alias Akbar Ali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sohan Dube Vs the State of Jharkhand

Basarat Mian Alias Ali Alias Basarat Ali Vs the State of Jharkhand