Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava rejected the criminal petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in an FIR alleging assault on vital parts causing life-threatening injuries, directing surrender within four weeks.
Relief for anticipatory bail is rejected; petitioner directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
A.B.A. No. 3795 of 2022
Parmeshwar Mahto …… Petitioner
Versus
----- -----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ritesh Kumar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P.
Order No.04/ Dated:22.08.2022
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Apprehending his arrest in connection with Silli P.S. Case No. 119 of 2021 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 452, 324, 504, 34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Ranchi, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.
As per F.I.R., allegation against the petitioner is that on 22. 12.2021 at about 5.30 P.M. scuffle arose between the parties while informant’s cattle were grazing in petitioner’s potato field. Meanwhile, present petitioner along with his associates started assaulting the informant indiscriminately and in the course of rescue his wife was also assaulted.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the F.I.R. and scuffle took place in a sudden manner, therefore, there was no intention to kill the informant and injury sustained by the informant is simple in nature though on the vital parts of the body. Petitioner has no criminal antecedent. It is lastly submitted that the petitioner undertakes to cooperate with the investigation of the case and also abide by all terms and conditions which may be imposed in the matter of granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.
Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner and submitted that petitioner has
assaulted the informant entering into his house by deadly weapon who has sustained injuries on his head which is dangerous to life. Final opinion about the nature of injury is subject to opinion of higher centre of treatment, i.e. RIMS, Ranchi. Investigation is at nascent stage, hence petitioner does not deserve anticipatory bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, and direct allegation of assault on the vital part of the body by the petitioner to the informant which appears to be dangerous to life, I am not inclined to extend the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, which stands rejected.
Petitioner is directed to surrender before the court below within four weeks from the date of this order. In case, petitioner surrenders before the trial court within four weeks and pray for regular bail, the learned court below shall consider the prayer for regular bail of the petitioner and dispose of on its own merit without being prejudiced by this order.
(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)
R.K
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner deserves the grant of anticipatory bail given the allegation of dangerous assault on vital parts of the body.
Whether the petitioner attends irregularly without prior intimation.
Parmeshwar Mahto
The State of Jharkhand
Baneshwar Mahto
Pradeep Kumar Srivastava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
