Allowed

Nitu Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC1 Aug 2022A.B.A./3921/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On the petitioners seeking anticipatory bail in an FIR alleging assault, snatching, and outraging modesty, the High Court of Jharkhand granted anticipatory bail upon surrender within four weeks and furnishing conditions including a bail bond, cooperation with investigation, and non-change of mobile number.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted conditioned on surrender within four weeks, furnishing a bail bond of Rs. 20,000 each with two sureties, cooperation with investigation, and provision of mobile number and Aa

Nitu Devi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.3921 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

------

¶4

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶5

-----For the Petitioners : None For the State : Mr. V.S. Sahay, A.P.P (In B.A. No.3921 of 2022) : Mrs. Shweta Singh, A.P.P. (In B.A. No.3952 of 2022)

¶6

------

¶7

Order No.03 Dated- 01.08.2022

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the State.

¶9

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Chatra(Sadar) P.S. Case No. 54 of 2022 instituted under Sections 341, 323, 379, 354, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

Both the anticipatory bail applications have been heard together as arising out of the same the F.I.R.

¶11

As per F.I.R., the allegation is that 24.02.2022 at about 9:00 am while the informant was returning with Rs.4,000/- cash and about to reach her house, meanwhile, present petitioners along with other coaccused persons armed with lathi danda started abusing in filthy language and snatched Rs.4,000/- cash, golden chain from the informant and outraged her modesty. In course of rescue, the informant’s son namely Chhotu Kumar was also assaulted and Pradeep Choudhary (present petitioner) pressed the neck of informant to kill her. The motive behind of occurrence is that, petitioners were indulged in preparing and selling country-made liquor in the Mohalla and informant and other Mohalla people used to protest the same. Hence, the F.I.R. has been lodged.

¶12

No one turns up on behalf of the petitioners.

¶13

Perusal of the record reveals that petitioners have taken grounds that they are innocent and have committed no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. There is case and counter case between the parties as Sadar P.S. Case No.53 of 2022 has been registered by one Sitaram Choudary against the informant and others. No incriminating articles have been recovered from the possession of petitioners.

¶14

Learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioners and submits that there are specific and direct allegations against the petitioners for assaulting and snatching cash, ornaments and outraging the modesty of the informant. Hence, petitioners may not be extended privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioners coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. Accordingly, the petitioners are directed to surrender in the Court within four weeks from today and in the event of their arrest or surrendering, they will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned CJM, Chatra in connection with Chatra(Sadar) P.S. Case No. 54 of 2022 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his 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.

¶16

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶17

Pappu/

Nitu Devi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitu Devi 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

MD Salam Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Manjur Hassan Alias Manjur Alam Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nandlal Mondal Vs the State of Jharkhand

Pradeep Kumar Alias Pradeep Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Nurain Alam Alias Munna Vs State of Jharkhand

Suraj Kumar Alias Suraj Kumar Lohra Vs the State of Jharkhand