Allowed

Rajesh Manjhi v. the State of Jharkhand

Jharkhand HC6 May 2024A.B.A./2766/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in an IPC case alleging assault. The High Court noted the dispute was likely a brotherly land dispute with simple injuries. It granted AM bail, conditioning surrender within four weeks, furnishing a bond, cooperating with investigation, and maintaining contact.

What did the court decide?

Privilege of anticipatory bail granted, directing surrender within four weeks and furnishing a bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties under conditions of CrPC 438(2).

Rajesh Manjhi Vs the State of Jharkhand — Murder and Culpable Homicide | Jharkhand HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI A.B.A. No. 2766 of 2023

¶2

Rajesh Manjhi 2. Shanti Manjhi ….. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Karu Manjhi ….. Opp. Parties --------CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA -------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Roy, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Suraj Deo Munda, A.P.P. ---------

¶3

Order No. 03/Dated: 06^th May, 2024

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶5

Apprehending their arrest in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 2535 of 2017 registered under Sections 341, 323, 326, 307, 504, 506, 34 of the I.P.C., the petitioners have moved to this Court for grant of privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶6

As per FIR, it is alleged that informant’s elder brother kept the property papers with him, wherever informant asked about the said papers, he was abused and threatened to be killed. It is further alleged that due to fear, the informant along with his family left the house and when his sons grew up, they returned to their village. It is further alleged that on 31.01.2017 at night, the accused persons came and brutally assaulted him with hot iron rod due to which he sustained burn injuries.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioners have submitted that petitioners are innocent and has committed no offence, both the parties are own brothers and due to land dispute both the parties have sustained some injuries in a sudden scuffle between them. Injuries are simple in nature. Hence, no offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is attracted in this case against the petitioners and other

¶8

P a g e 1 | 2

¶9

offences are simple in nature. Petitioners have no criminal antecedents. Hence, the petitioners may be extended the privilege of anticipatory bail.

¶10

On the other hand, learned Addl.P.P appearing for the State opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. Hence, petitioners do not deserve anticipatory bail.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of allegation against petitioners coupled with materials available on record, I am inclined to extend the 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 his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail 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 Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Giridih in connection with Bagodar P.S. Case No. 140 of 2017 corresponding to G.R. No. 2535 of 2017 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 he will not change his 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.

¶12

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶13

Simran-Amar/

¶14

P a g e 2 | 2

Rajesh Manjhi v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Manjhi 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

Rajan Kumar Alias Pintu Singh Vs the State of Jharkhand

MD Sahnoor Vs the State of Jharkhand

Dego Saw Alias Khago Saw Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mukesh Kumar Alias Mukesh Mehta Vs the State of Jharkhand

Asgar Khan Vs The State Of Jharkhand And Anr.

Sanjay Kumar Vs the State of Jharkhand