MD Hasnain Ansari Alias Hasnain Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

MD Hasnain Ansari Alias Hasnain Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand — Jharkhand HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Anticipatory bail granted: petitioner to surrender within three weeks and, on surrender/arrest, be released on bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih, subject to Section 438(2) CrPC conditions and non-change of the Aadhaar-indicated mobile number.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, apprehending arrest in Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023 (pending before the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih), is entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. +1 more

Court's answer

Anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner apprehending arrest in Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023.

Ratio / Principle

Bail granted although the only allegation against the petitioner is of entering into the informant's house, since no overt act by the petitioner upon the victim is alleged.

Key takeaways

The police final form on the identical earlier case (Pachamba P.S. Case No. 136 of 2023, lodged by Roshni Perveen, in which the present informant's father was witness) recording that the case was falsely registered weighed in favour of granting anticipatory bail.ratio¶12
Petitioner directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks; on surrender/arrest he shall be released on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih, in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023.ratio¶13
Release made subject to the conditions laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with the additional condition that the petitioner will not change the mobile number indicated in his Aadhar.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

ANTICIPATORY BAIL GRANTED — High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.), A.B.A. No. 880 of 2024, decided 04.04.2024: Md. Hasnain Ansari @ Hasnain Ansari, apprehending arrest in Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023 (registered under ss.147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 354-A, 354-D, 379, 452, 506, 509 I.P.C.), pending before the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih, granted anticipatory bail. Grounds relied on by the Court: (i) an identical earlier case, Pachamba P.S. Case No. 136 of 2023, lodged by Roshni Perveen in which the present informant's father was a witness, had ended in a police final form declaring that case falsely registered; and (ii) no overt act by the petitioner upon the victim is alleged, the only allegation against him being entry into the informant's house. Terms: surrender within three weeks; release on bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each; conditions under Section 438(2) CrPC; petitioner not to change the mobile number indicated in his Aadhar.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A. B. A. No.880 of 2024

Md. Hasnain Ansari @ Hasnain Ansari ...... … Petitioner Versus

The State of Jharkhand .…. … Opposite Party

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :Mr. P.K. Deomani, Advocate For the State : Mr. S.K. Verma, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. Suraj Prakash, Advocate

02/ 04.04.2024 : Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023, registered under section 147, 148, 341, 323, 324, 325, 307, 354-A, 354-D, 379, 452, 506, 509 of I.P.C., pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that at the instance of the father of the informant namely, Md. Mumtaz Ansari false case has been registered against the petitioner. He further submits that an identical case was lodged by one Roshni Perveen in which father of the present informant was witness and police investigated the same and submitted final form saying that falsely case has been registered. He refers to annexures brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit. He submits that there is no allegation of overt act by the petitioner upon the victim. By way drawing the attention to the contents of F.I.R, he submits that allegations are against Md. Shahid and Md. Dilshad. On these grounds, he submits that the petitioner may be provided privilege of anticipatory bail.

Learned counsel for the State opposes the prayer on the ground that allegation of entering into the house and assaulting the persons is there.

Learned counsel for the informant opposes the prayer and submits that nothing can be linked with the earlier case and the present case is separate one in view of that the petitioner does not deserve privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering that an identical case being Pachamba P.S. Case No. 136 of 2023 was lodged by one Roshni Perveen in which the father of the present informant was witness and police investigated the same and submitted final form saying that falsely case has been registered, there is no allegation of overt act by the petitioner upon the victim, only allegation against the petitioner is of entering into the house of informant, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the above named petitioner is directed to surrender before the learned court within three weeks from today and in the event of his surrender / arrest, the -1-

petitioner shall be released on bail, on furnishing bail bonds of Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each, to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Giridih, in connection with Pachamba P.S. Case No. 130 of 2023, subject to conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the petitioner will not change his mobile number which is indicated in his Aadhar.

( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)

satyarthi-

-2-