Dismissed

Suresh Yadav v. State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 May 2024A.B.A./1330/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Jharkhand rejected the petitioner's application for anticipatory bail in an FIR involving multiple IPC offences, noting direct assault allegations and injury against the petitioner, distinguishing it from co-accused who had obtained bail. The court directed surrender and filing of a regular bail petition.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for anticipatory bail rejected; petitioner directed to surrender and file appropriate petition.

Suresh Yadav Vs State of Jharkhand — Anticipatory Bail | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI A.B.A. No. 1330 of 2024

¶2

----

¶3

Suresh Yadav .... Petitioner

¶4

-- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand .... Opposite Party

¶5

¶6

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

¶7

For the Petitioner :- Mr. Ram Lakhan Yadav, Advocate For the State :- Mr. Arup Kumar Dey, Advocate

¶8

¶9

6 /06.05.2024 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State.

¶10

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Hirodih P.S.Case No.18 of 2023 registered for the offence under sections 147, 149, 341, 323, 324, 307, 354, 379, 504, 506 IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Giridih.

¶11

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are case and counter case between the parties and there is dispute with regard to land and petitioner has also lodged the case against the informant being Hirodih P.S.Case No.19 of 2023 and injury is not there and co-accused has been provided privilege of anticipatory bail in A.B.A. No.7392 of 2023.

¶12

Learned State counsel opposed the prayer on the ground that allegations are there.

¶13

Looking to the contents of the FIR it transpires that direct allegation is against this petitioner of assault and so far as other accused persons who have been provided privilege of anticipatory bail is concerned, against them there is no direct allegation, and the said anticipatory bail order is not applicable in the case of the petitioner and further the injury is on the head.

¶14

In the attending facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, and hence, the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner, is, hereby, rejected. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is hereby dismissed.

¶15

However, if the petitioner surrenders before the leraned court and files appropriate petition, the said petition will be decided in accordance with law without prejudice to this order.

¶16

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

¶17

SI/

Suresh Yadav v. State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Yadav v. 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

Haidar Ali Alias MD Haidar Ali Vs the State of Jharkhand

Miraj Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

Amit Kumar Pandey Alias Amit Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand

Rajan Prasad Ram Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Rajesh Choudhary Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sangeeta Kumari Vs The State Of Jharkhand