Allowed

Prashant Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC9 Feb 2022A.B.A./517/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ranchi, assuming jurisdiction, granted anticipatory bail to petitioners facing charges of affrays and assault under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 353, and 427 IPC, subject to strict conditions including financial deposit, victim compensation, and cooperation with investigation.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to surrender within six weeks and enlarged on bail upon complying with conditions including deposit payment and furnishing sureties.

Prashant Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand — Bail and Remand | Jharkhand HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No.517 of 2022

¶2

------

¶3

Prashant Kumar

¶4

Baiju Mahto

¶5

Raj Kumar Mahto

¶6

Dhaneshwar Mahto

¶7

Sunil Mahto

¶8

Dahan Mahto @ Jahan Mahto

¶9

Kasinath Mahto

¶10

Chaitra Mahto @ Chaita Mahto

¶11

Baijnath Mahto

¶12

10.Pankaj Mahto

¶13

11.Khemlal Mahto

¶14

12.Munita Deo

¶15

13.Kito Mahto .... .... …. Petitioners

¶16

Versus

¶17

The State of Jharkhand

¶18

.... .... ....Opposite Party

¶19

------

¶20

CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

¶21

------ For the Petitioners : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Singh, Advocate For the State : Mr. Sanjay Kr. Srivastava, Addl.P.P

¶22

Order No.02 Dated- 09.02.2022

¶23

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No. 57 of 2021 instituted under Sections 147, 148, 149, 332, 333, 353 and 427 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioners have moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶27

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the allegation against the petitioners is that when the informant public servant along with other police personnel were engaged in the official duty for removal of encroachment, the petitioners along with the co-accused persons being members of unlawful assembly used criminal force against the informant-public servant and the police personnel from discharging their

¶28

duties and pelted stones at them resulting in injuries to constable No.675David Tuddu and damaged the official vehicle. It is submitted that the allegation against the petitioners is false. It is next submitted that the petitioners undertake that they will not engage in any similar type of activities in future and also will not go to or near the place of occurrence during the pendency of the case. It is lastly submitted that the petitioners are ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation of the case and undertake to jointly deposit Rs.50,000/- with Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag without prejudice to their defence in this case and further undertake to jointly pay ad interim victim compensation of Rs.25,000/without prejudice to their defence in this case to the constable No.675-David Tuddu. Hence, it is submitted that the petitioners be given the privileges of anticipatory bail.

¶29

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

¶30

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 within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, the petitioners will be enlarged on bail on showing proof of jointly deposit of Rs.50,000/- with Deputy Commissioner, Hazaribag without prejudice to their defence in this case and also jointly depositing a demand draft of Rs.25,000/- as ad interim victim compensation without prejudice to their defence in this case drawn in favour of the constable No.675-David Tuddu 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 SDJM, Hazaribag in connection with Barkagaon P.S. Case No. 57 of 2021 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

¶31

the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that they will not change their mobile number during the pendency of the case with further condition that they will not engage in similar type of activities in future and also will not go to or near the place of occurrence during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of

¶32

Criminal Procedure.

¶33

In case the petitioners deposit the said demand draft, the court below is directed to issue notice to the constable No.675-David Tuddu and on his proper identification, the court below shall handover the same to him forthwith.

¶34

(Anil Kumar Choudhary, J . )

¶35

Pappu/

Prashant Kumar v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prashant Kumar 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

Shekh Kabir Ulla Khan Alias Babu Alias Shekh Kabir Ullah Khan Vs the State of Jharkhand

Touhid Sk Alias MD Tohid Saikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Devan Yadav Alias Devan Jadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Girdhari Lal Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand

Azad Sheikh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Ganga Kumar Yadav Vs the State of Jharkhand