Masuwar Ansari Vs the State of Jharkhand

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

B.A. No.29 of 2025

Masuwar Ansari age 30 years old, son of Late Abdul Sattar Ansari, resident of village Jhotar Dalwaniya, P.O. & P.S. Dandai, DistrictGarhwa.

¶4

… Petitioner Versus The State of Jharkhand … Opposite Party

¶5

Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP KUMAR SRIVASTAVA

¶6

For the Petitioner : Mr. Rakesh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Sabyasanchi, Adv. For the State : Mr. Anup Pawan Topno, A.P.P. For the Informant : Mr. G.K. Sinha, Adv.

¶7

Order No.03/Dated- 07^th March, 2025.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

The petitioner has been an made accused in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No. 53/2024 registered for offences punishable under Sections 109, 115(2), 117(2), 118(1), 126(2), 190, 191(1), 191(3), 324(4), 324(5), 352 of B.N.S.

¶10

As per FIR, the accused persons having land dispute with the informant party. In the morning on 01.09.2024 at about 7 A.M. the accused persons assaulted informant party in which informant party sustained injuries and two persons sustained grievous injuries on their hand.

¶11

Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence at all as alleged in the FIR. It is next submitted that other-co-accused person namely Tasauar Ansari @ Hasuvar Ansari has been granted regular bail by Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.01.2025 in B.A. No. 9615 of 2024. The allegation against the petitioner is that he has also assaulted one Amarullah Ansari through sharp cutting weapon, but the injuries sustained by him opined to be simple in nature. There is case and counter-case between the parties due to land dispute. Petitioner is languishing in judicial custody since 27.11.2024. Petitioner undertakes to co-operate in the trial of the case by

¶12

Page 1 of 2

¶13

remaining physically present as and when required and shall not indulge in any manner in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the witnesses of prosecution, hence, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

¶14

Learned Addl. P.P. assisted by learned counsel for the informant has opposed the prayer for bail of the petitioner and submitted that five persons were injured in this occurrence from the side of the informant. There is participation of the present petitioner has also shown in assaulting through sharp cutting weapon. The nature of injury is not decisive in this case rather there was intention to commit murder of the informant party. Therefore, he does not deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of this case, materials available on record and also in view of custody period of the petitioner, I am inclined to release the above-named petitioner, on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty-five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Garhwa in connection with Dandai P.S. Case No. 53/2024, subject to the conditions:

¶16

(1). Petitioner shall remain physically present on each and every date till the conclusion of the trial of this case unless prevented from sufficient cause to the satisfaction of the Learned Trial Court.

¶17

(2). Petitioner shall not indulge in any or other similar offence till the conclusion of the trial.

¶18

(3). Petitioner shall not indulge in tampering with the prosecution evidences or influencing the prosecution witnesses.

¶19

(Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.)

¶20

Amar/-

¶21

Page 2 of 2

Masuwar Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Masuwar Ansari v. the State of Jharkhand

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mundrika Mulayam Singh Yadav And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Haribol Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Rajen Ghosh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Aasman Khandait Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sonu Hsessa Alias Sonu Hessa Alias Sandi Hessa Alias Deke Hessa Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shyamapad Ghosh Vs the State of Jharkhand

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

Mundrika  Mulayam Singh Yadav And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Haribol Mahto Vs State of Jharkhand And Ors.

Rajen Ghosh And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand

Aasman Khandait Vs the State of Jharkhand

Sonu Hsessa Alias Sonu Hessa Alias Sandi Hessa Alias Deke Hessa Vs the State of Jharkhand

Shyamapad Ghosh Vs the State of Jharkhand

Mundrika Mulayam Singh Yadav And Ors. Vs State of Jharkhand